SRE 2400 explained: this guide covers what it means, who it applies to, the step-by-step process, documents required, fees, due dates and penalties in India — so you can stay compliant with confidence and avoid costly mistakes.
The second half of SRE 2400 (Revised) covers how a review ends: what to do about events after the balance sheet date, the representations to obtain from management, how the conclusion is formed and worded, and what the report and file must contain. Part 1 of this series deals with acceptance and procedures. Preparing the financial pack and the representations early is part of what our virtual CFO services cover.
SRE 2400 (Revised), effective for reviews of financial statements for periods beginning on or after April 1, 2016 (paragraph 13). ICAI may revise standards, so check the current text on icai.org.
The practitioner requests written representations from management, evaluates whether enough evidence has been obtained, and then forms a conclusion in the negative form ("nothing has come to our attention"). The conclusion is unmodified, qualified, adverse or a disclaimer. The report must state that a review is limited assurance and substantially less than an audit (paragraph 86). If management will not give representations, the result is disclaimer or withdrawal (paragraph 64).
Subsequent events (paragraphs 58 to 60)
If the practitioner learns of events between the date of the statements and the date of the report that need adjustment or disclosure, management is asked to correct them (paragraph 58). The practitioner has no duty to perform procedures after the report date, but if a fact becomes known after that date and before the statements are issued which might have changed the report, the practitioner discusses it with management, decides whether the statements need amendment and asks how management intends to deal with it (paragraph 59). If management will not amend and the report is already with the entity, the practitioner tells management and those charged with governance not to issue the statements to third parties until amended, and, if they are nevertheless issued unamended, takes appropriate action to seek to prevent reliance on the report (paragraph 60). Our post on SA 560 covers the audit counterpart.
Written representations (paragraphs 61 to 65)
| Requirement | In practice | Paragraph |
|---|---|---|
| Responsibility representation | Management states it has met its responsibilities under the agreed terms: preparation under the framework, access to information, and that all transactions are recorded | 61 |
| Specific disclosures | Management confirms it has disclosed related parties and transactions, known or suspected frauds, non-compliance with laws affecting the statements, going-concern information, subsequent events, material commitments and contingencies, and material non-monetary transactions | 62 |
| Representation not given | Discuss with management and those charged with governance, re-evaluate management's integrity, consider the effect on the conclusion | 63 |
| Disclaimer or withdrawal | Where doubt about integrity makes representations unreliable, or the required representations are not given | 64 |
| Date | As near as practicable to, but not after, the date of the report, covering all statements and periods in the report | 65 |
The effect is that a review cannot be completed on management's silence. Our article on SA 580 gives the audit parallel.
Evaluating the evidence (paragraphs 66 to 68)
The practitioner evaluates whether sufficient appropriate evidence has been obtained and, if not, performs other procedures judged necessary (paragraph 66). If evidence cannot be obtained, the practitioner discusses with management and those charged with governance the effects of the limitation on the scope of the review (paragraph 67). Paragraph 68 requires the evidence to be evaluated for its effect on the report.
Forming the conclusion (paragraphs 69 to 85)
In forming the conclusion the practitioner checks that the statements refer to or describe the framework, that terminology and titles are appropriate, that significant accounting policies are disclosed and consistent with the framework, that estimates appear reasonable, that the information appears relevant, reliable, comparable and understandable, and that disclosures are adequate (paragraph 69). The practitioner also weighs uncorrected misstatements, including those from the previous year's review, and qualitative aspects of accounting practice such as indicators of bias in management's judgments (paragraph 70). For fair presentation frameworks the overall presentation, structure and content are also considered (paragraph 71).
The four forms of conclusion
An unmodified conclusion is given when limited assurance has been obtained to conclude that nothing has come to the practitioner's attention suggesting the statements are not prepared, in all material respects, under the framework (paragraph 73). A modified conclusion is required when the statements are materially misstated or when sufficient appropriate evidence on a material item cannot be obtained (paragraph 75).
| Situation | Material but not pervasive | Material and pervasive | Paragraph |
|---|---|---|---|
| Statements are materially misstated | Qualified conclusion | Adverse conclusion | 77 |
| Cannot obtain sufficient evidence | Qualified conclusion | Disclaimer of conclusion | 81 |
Where the limit on scope is imposed by management after acceptance, the possible effects are material and pervasive, and withdrawal is possible under law, the practitioner must withdraw (paragraph 82). A modified conclusion uses the headings "Qualified Conclusion", "Adverse Conclusion" or "Disclaimer of Conclusion" and a separate basis paragraph before the conclusion (paragraph 76). For misstatements, the basis describes and quantifies the effect unless impracticable (paragraph 80); for evidence limits it gives the reasons (paragraph 85).
Audit opinion compared with review conclusion
| Feature | Audit opinion (SA 700 series) | Review conclusion (SRE 2400 (Revised)) |
|---|---|---|
| Assurance | Reasonable | Limited |
| Wording | Positive: statements give a true and fair view or are fairly presented | Negative: nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe the statements are misstated |
| Evidence | Risk-based testing, confirmations, inspection | Mainly inquiry and analytical procedures |
| Modified forms | Qualified, adverse, disclaimer of opinion | Qualified, adverse, disclaimer of conclusion |
| Statement on audit | It is an audit | The report says the procedures are substantially less than an audit and no audit opinion is given |
For the audit modifications see our post on SA 705.
The review report (paragraphs 86 to 92)
The report is in writing and must carry, in outline: a title showing it is the report of an independent practitioner for a review engagement; the addressee; an introductory paragraph identifying the statements reviewed and their date and period; management's responsibilities; for special purpose statements, their purpose; the practitioner's responsibility with reference to the SRE; a description of a review and its limitations, including that it is a limited assurance engagement and that the procedures are "substantially less than those performed in an audit" (paragraph 86(g)(iii)); the conclusion under that heading; the modified conclusion and its basis, where relevant; a reference to ethical requirements; and the date, signature and place. The standard also deals with Emphasis of Matter and Other Matter paragraphs (paragraphs 87 to 90) and other legal reporting (paragraph 91). The report is dated no earlier than the date sufficient appropriate evidence is obtained and those with recognised authority have taken responsibility for the statements (paragraph 92). Appendix 2 of the standard has illustrative reports, which we do not reproduce.
Documentation (paragraphs 93 to 96)
The file must let an experienced practitioner with no previous connection understand the nature, timing and extent of procedures, the results and conclusions, and significant matters and judgments (paragraph 93). It records who did and who reviewed the work, with dates (paragraph 94), discussions with management and others on significant matters (paragraph 95), and how any inconsistent information was resolved (paragraph 96).
Worked example (illustrative)
Gaurav Textiles Pvt Ltd, an invented company, gets a review report on its half-year statements for an investor. The practitioner finds that an illustrative Rs 40 lakh claim from a supplier is not disclosed. Management agrees to add the disclosure, so the practitioner gives an unmodified conclusion. Suppose instead that management refuses and the claim is material but not pervasive: the conclusion becomes qualified, with a basis paragraph describing the omission and, where practicable, including the omitted disclosure (paragraph 80(c)). If management also declined to sign a representation letter, paragraph 64 would require a disclaimer or withdrawal.
Common lapses
- Dating the report before the representations or before management has taken responsibility for the statements.
- Using audit wording in a review report.
- Giving an unmodified conclusion despite an uncorrected material misstatement.
- Overlooking events after the report date but before issue.
- A thin file that does not show who did the work.
Need help finalising a review?
Representation letters, subsequent-event checks and clean schedules are where reviews slip at the last stage, and they are mostly in management's hands. Our team can help you prepare complete, consistent financial packs and management information; see our virtual CFO services.
Key takeaways
- Representations are required; if they are not given the practitioner disclaims or withdraws (paragraphs 63 and 64).
- The conclusion is expressed in negative form and can be unmodified, qualified, adverse or a disclaimer.
- A material misstatement leads to a qualified or adverse conclusion; lack of evidence leads to a qualified conclusion or disclaimer.
- The report must say it is limited assurance, substantially less than an audit (paragraph 86).
- The report is dated only once evidence is obtained and management has taken responsibility (paragraph 92).
Read next
- SRE 2400 (Revised), part 1: acceptance and procedures
- SRE 2410, review of interim financial information
- SA 705, modifications to the opinion
- Audit, review, agreed-upon procedures and compilation compared
Disclaimer: Based on the Standards on Auditing, the review, assurance and related services standards, the Compendium of Standards on Internal Audit (as on 1 October 2022) and the Compendium of Forensic Accounting and Investigation Standards (as on September 2025) issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, in the versions named in the article, as consulted on 4 October 2026. ICAI revises standards from time to time; check the current text and effective dates on icai.org and the Companies Act provisions referred to. This article is general information, not legal advice; check the official text before acting.