Authors remarks: earlier one my article I have explained- the definition audit. Object of audit, & Divergence flanked by Investigation and Audit, this article I have clarified the object of investigation, I hope this will helpful for leaner, this article I have tried to explicated as clear and short approach,
Sometimes learners and readers get on impression that auditing and investigation means the same things but there is a lot of difference between the two. Investigation means a searching inquiry into the profit, also earning capacity of the financial positions of a concern or to find out the extent of the fraud if there is any apprehensive as regards it and so on,
Introduction: Investigation is conceded out with a certain object in view example – to find out the profit earning capacity or the financial position of a concern or a fraud and the extent thereof, investigation examination - inquiry - research express the idea of a dynamic effort to find out something’s
Investigation on behalf of an personage or a promoter of a joint stock company which requirements to purchase a private running business in order to a convinced the financial position and the earning capacity of the concern proposed to be taken over,
The investigation report is sent to the party which prearranged him for the purpose of investigation and the investigation report is positive report, Investigation for claim under an insurance policy covering consequential losses- example - in the case of fire, where the directors are suspected of fraud. Than investigator need those companies. Income tax authorities for tax liability or for detection of undisclosed income investigation is necessary of this situation, Investigation conceded out on behalf of outside, however investigation also be carried out on behalf of proprietor in some case when fraud is suspected
Investigation is to find out what actually happened and identify what action is needed to protect the organization from loss or harm. An investigation is a fact-finding exercise, not a trial or tribunal. The investigation may make findings and recommendations, a poorly conducted internal investigation may result in corrupt employees going unpunished, individuals under investigation being treated unfairly and the organization’s resources being wasted
Conclusion: Investigations can go wrong, and when they do the penalty can be devastating for the individuals implicated and very pricey also for the organization. The employee’s demand was upheld and her release was lined unwarranted because an inconsistency in the substantiation arose at the corrective hearing, but was not experienced or examined properly.
The investigation method was also defective. This case is just one example that demonstrates the importance of ensuring investigations are thorough and strong, and are conducted objectively so that all the relevant evidence is protected,