Section 255, 258, 260 and 476 Audit of Cost Account of the Company through Audit Generating Cost Account Record Reports Instead of complying with the requirements of the law, the impact analysis, analysis and inquiry into the facts disclosed in the account were disclosed to the Funds. Was expelled from the company and the cost accounts were to cover a series of fraudulent transactions so that such incidents and transactions could be identified, if the cost auditors paid their obligations in full. However, in their reports, for the relevant year, it was reported to the directors that the Companies Ordinance, 1984 According to section (1) of section 230 (1), the required expenditure was properly calculated by the company. Was. As a result, the information / facts circulated through cost statements over the years was misleading due to a loss in profitability. The impact of transaction data on cost data for the relevant audit years was determined by the Company's management. Retained cost accounting records were not included that did not reflect a true and fair view of the production, processing, manufacturing and marketing of the Company's product costs. The relevant year seemingly failed to fulfill its duties and responsibilities laid down by the Cost Auditors Company Ordinance, 1984, there was no change in the report in relation to the matter, which led to the production, capacity utilization and Had damaged the right and fair view. The Company's Ordinance to the Cost Auditors in Trade, 1984
Related judgments — Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan, 2009
