This is a composite, illustrative scenario, not an account of a named client. A write-down of roughly ₹35 lakh had been booked at the prior year end against a batch of slow-moving raw material, reducing its carrying value to estimated net realisable value in line with the standard inventory valuation policy. In the first quarter of the following year, before this audit began, the entire write-down was reversed through a journal entry with no supporting documentation beyond a note reading 'revised assessment' — no sale of the stock had occurred, no new customer order had been secured, and the physical condition of the material was unchanged.
Why this mattered beyond the one entry
A reversal of an inventory write-down is only appropriate when the circumstances that caused the write-down have genuinely changed — new evidence of recoverable value, such as a confirmed order or a market price recovery. Reversing a write-down with no such evidence, three months after it was booked, raises the question of whether the original write-down was itself a deliberate smoothing device: take the charge in a year that could absorb it, then reverse it quietly in the next period to flatter that period's results, with no real change in the underlying facts either time.
What the investigation established
- 01Pulled the journal entry and everything attached to itNo supporting memo, no revised net realisable value calculation, no reference to a new order or buyer — just the single-line narration.
- 02Asked the person who approved the reversal to explain the basisThe explanation given was that the material had since been found usable in a different product line, but no production record or consumption entry supported that claim at the time of the reversal.
- 03Checked whether the stock had actually moved since the reversalAs of the audit date, several months later, the same stock remained in the warehouse, unconsumed and unsold, undermining the 'found usable' explanation.
- 04Compared the timing to the two quarters' reported resultsThe write-down had landed in a quarter that had comfortably met its target regardless; the reversal landed in a quarter that would have missed target without it.
| Period | Entry | Evidence on file |
|---|---|---|
| Prior year end | Write-down of ₹35 lakh booked | Ageing analysis and NRV assessment — adequately supported |
| Following Q1 | Full ₹35 lakh reversed | One-line narration, no NRV recalculation, no sale or order |
| This audit date | Stock still on hand, unsold, unconsumed | Contradicts the 'found usable' explanation given for the reversal |
What went into the file
- The original write-down support and the reversal entry side by side, with the absence of new evidence documented explicitly.
- The quarterly results context, noting the pattern without asserting intent beyond what the evidence supported.
- A proposed adjustment to reinstate the write-down for this year's financial statements, since no valid reversal event had occurred.
- Escalation to the audit committee given the smoothing pattern, independent of whether the amount itself was material to this year's statements in isolation.
A write-down reversal is a legitimate accounting event only when net realisable value has genuinely recovered. A reversal timed to a quarter that needed the earnings, with no sale, no order, and no updated valuation to point to, is a pattern that belongs in front of the audit committee regardless of the rupee amount involved.
This is practical guidance written for audit teams, not an authoritative statement of any standard or statute. Standards, forms and timelines change. Check the current text issued by the ICAI and the relevant authority before relying on anything here in an audit file.
Related resources
- Inventory & stockInventory valuation audit: FIFO, weighted average and cost testingTesting the cost formula actually applied against the one disclosed, NRV testing, and overhead absorption into manufacturing cost.
- Inventory & stockAuditing slow-moving and obsolete inventoryAgeing analysis by SKU, testing the provisioning policy against actual realization, and red flags where a policy is never applied in practice.
- Inventory & stockThe obsolete stock nobody had provided forA product line discontinued eighteen months earlier was still carried at full cost. Nobody had looked at it since the last unit sold.
Free tools, no signup
Each one reads a file entirely in your browser — or, for two of them, just answers a few questions — and nothing is ever uploaded.
- Purchase register checkDuplicate payments, round-sum amounts, weekend-dated invoices, incomplete records.
- GSTR-2B reconcilerMatches your purchase register against GSTR-2B — missing invoices either side, amount mismatches.
- Bank reconciliation checkerMatches your cash book against a bank statement — what's outstanding on each side.
- Fixed asset register checkDuplicate asset codes, missing location or useful life, negative net book value.
- Payroll red-flag scannerBank accounts shared across employees, and records missing an ID, PAN or salary.
- CARO applicability checkerAnswer a few questions about the company and see which CARO 2020 clauses likely apply.
- MSME payment delay checkerMSME-flagged invoices paid — or still unpaid — beyond the 45-day Section 22 limit.
- Related-party transaction screenerTransactions above a threshold you set with no approval reference, grouped by counterparty.
- Depreciation useful life checkerCompares a useful life in use against the Schedule II, Part C indicative figure.
- Materiality calculatorOverall and performance materiality against PBT, revenue, assets or equity, with reasoning shown.
- Sample size calculatorStatistical sample size for a test of controls or a substantive test of detail.