Imagine a large company like Rajesh & Co. Pvt. Ltd. with operations across 10 states, ₹500 crores in turnover. One audit firm alone may not have the bandwidth or regional expertise to audit everything. So the company appoints two or more audit firms simultaneously — this is a Joint Audit, and SA 299 is the standard that governs how those auditors must work together.
The first thing SA 299 establishes is the concept of division of work. Joint auditors must divide the audit areas among themselves right at the planning stage — who covers which branches, which subsidiaries, which account heads. This isn't optional; it must be documented. Whatever area a joint auditor takes responsibility for, they are individually and fully responsible for that portion. Think of it like two lawyers dividing a case — each owns their part completely.
But here's the critical exam point: for certain things, all joint auditors are jointly and severally responsible. These include: (a) the audit report — all must sign it; (b) matters which are not specifically divided between them; (c) work done by one auditor which the other is aware of being wrong or unsatisfactory but still signs off on; and (d) the overall view presented by the financial statements. So while daily work is divided, the final responsibility is shared. You can't hide behind 'that was the other firm's area' for the report itself.
SA 299 also requires joint auditors to coordinate and communicate — they must share findings, discuss significant issues, and ensure consistency before signing the report. If there is a disagreement between joint auditors on any matter, each auditor has the right to express their own opinion. The report may even carry qualifications from only one of the joint auditors. This is asked frequently as a 4-mark or 6-mark question in the Auditing paper — especially scenarios where one auditor disagrees with the other.