ICAI Peer Review Services –
Independent Peer Reviewer for CA Firms in India
ICAI Peer Review is no longer something CA firms can defer or treat as routine. A well-conducted peer review strengthens audit quality, identifies gaps before they become regulatory problems, and builds your firm's credibility with clients, bankers, and regulators.
Overview
ICAI-Recognised Peer Reviewer
N D Savla & Associates is an ICAI-recognised Peer Review firm conducting peer reviews for practice units in accordance with the guidelines issued by the ICAI Peer Review Board. Our approach combines technical rigour with professional sensitivity — we assess what needs to be assessed, identify what genuinely needs improvement, and communicate our observations in a way that supports quality enhancement rather than simply cataloguing deficiencies.
The Programme
What Is ICAI Peer Review?
Peer Review is a quality assurance programme mandated by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI). Under the programme, the audit work and quality control systems of a Chartered Accountant practice unit — also referred to as a Practice Unit or PU — are examined by an independent reviewer (a fellow CA in practice) to assess whether the firm's audits and assurance engagements comply with:
- Standards on Auditing (SAs) issued by ICAI
- Standard on Quality Control 1 (SQC 1) — the quality control framework for audit and assurance firms
- ICAI's Code of Ethics, including independence requirements
- Engagement acceptance and continuance procedures
- Engagement documentation and working paper standards
- Reporting standards — whether audit reports are properly structured and contain all required elements
Applicability
Which CA Firms Are Required to Undergo Peer Review?
The ICAI Peer Review Board has phased in mandatory peer review in multiple stages, progressively expanding the scope of applicable practice units. As of the current framework, peer review is mandatory for practice units that:
- Conduct statutory audits of listed companies (any exchange)
- Conduct statutory audits of banks, NBFCs, insurance companies, stock exchanges, or commodity exchanges
- Conduct statutory audits of public sector undertakings and government companies
- Are empanelled with the CAG (Comptroller and Auditor General of India) for statutory audits
- Are empanelled with the RBI for bank branch audits
- Conduct audits of entities whose paid-up capital exceeds Rs. 10 crore
- Conduct audits of entities with public deposits above Rs. 10 crore
- Conduct 25 or more statutory audit assignments in a financial year
ICAI periodically extends the applicability norms, so firms that do not currently fall under mandatory peer review should track changes to the Board's circulars. Firms applying for bank empanelment, CAG empanelment, or regulatory appointments increasingly find that peer review certification is a prerequisite or a positive credential that supports their empanelment applications.
Scope of Review
What Does a Peer Review Cover?
A peer review is structured around two interconnected assessments:
Firm-Level Review — Quality Control Systems
The reviewer examines whether the firm has adequate quality control policies and procedures in place, covering: leadership responsibilities for quality within the firm; ethical requirements and independence; acceptance and continuance of client relationships and specific engagements; human resource policies (training, assignment, supervision); engagement performance standards; and monitoring of quality control systems. Many smaller and mid-sized firms have informal practices in all these areas but lack the documentation that a peer review requires. This is typically the first area where observations arise.
Engagement-Level Review — Individual Audit Files
The reviewer selects a sample of audit engagements and examines the working paper files in detail. The review assesses whether: the engagement planning, risk assessment, and audit procedures were appropriate for the engagement; audit evidence was sufficient and appropriately documented; the audit report is consistent with the findings; independence was maintained; and all required communications with management and those charged with governance were completed. This is where documentation gaps are most commonly found.
From Our Experience
Common Gaps That Peer Reviews Identify
Based on our experience as peer reviewers, the areas where practice units most commonly receive observations include:
Audit planning and risk identification done mentally or verbally but not documented in working papers per SA 315 and SA 330.
Engagement letters not renewed annually or not capturing the updated scope and fee terms.
No documented confirmation of independence from partners and staff at the engagement level.
Letters not tailored to the specific engagement or missing representations required under SA 580.
Audit reports not structured per the revised SA 700 format, or key audit matters not reported where required.
No written SQC 1-compliant quality control manual or policies, even where practices are reasonable.
Our Methodology
Our Approach as Peer Reviewer
When we conduct a peer review for a practice unit, our methodology follows the ICAI Peer Review Board's guidelines with these defining characteristics:
Independence and Objectivity
We have no conflicts of interest with the practice unit, its partners, or its clients. Our assessment is genuinely independent.
Proportionate Assessment
We assess observations against the risk profile and scale of the practice unit. A small firm conducting five audits of unlisted companies is not held to the same documentation intensity as a large firm with listed company audits.
Constructive Communication
We explain observations clearly, note the relevant standard being assessed, and where possible suggest how the gap can be addressed — not just flag what is missing.
Confidentiality
All information reviewed during the peer review — audit files, client information, firm policies — is treated with strict professional confidentiality.
Timely Completion
We complete the review and prepare the report within the timelines agreed with the practice unit and required by the Board.
Frequently Asked Questions
ICAI Peer Review – FAQs
Peer Review Due? Work With a Reviewer Who Understands the Process From Both Sides.
N D Savla & Associates conducts ICAI Peer Reviews with independence, professionalism, and a genuine commitment to quality enhancement — not just compliance ticking. If your firm is approaching a peer review, reach out to discuss.
Ready to schedule your ICAI Peer Review?
Talk to our team to understand the process, timelines, and what preparation is recommended for your firm.
Get in TouchFrequently Asked Questions
No — peer review is not mandatory for all CA firms. It applies to practice units that fall within the categories prescribed by the ICAI Peer Review Board, primarily those conducting statutory audits of listed companies, banks, NBFCs, insurance companies, public sector entities, or CAG/RBI-empanelled firms. It also applies to firms conducting 25 or more statutory audit assignments per year and audits of entities with paid-up capital or public deposits above specified thresholds. ICAI periodically expands the scope, so firms should monitor Board circulars.
Practice units that are required to undergo peer review but have not done so may face restrictions in their professional activities — including ineligibility for empanelment with banks, the CAG, and regulatory bodies. ICAI has progressively tightened compliance requirements, and non-compliant firms risk being reported to the Peer Review Board and facing disciplinary consequences. Additionally, clients increasingly ask for peer review status as part of auditor selection criteria.
The duration depends on the size of the practice unit and the number of engagements selected for review. For a small or mid-sized firm with a limited number of statutory audit engagements, the fieldwork typically takes two to three days of working paper review plus a pre-review discussion and a reporting phase. The complete process — from initiation to ICAI submission — generally takes four to eight weeks.
Yes, and this is strongly advisable. Many observations in peer reviews arise from documentation gaps rather than substantive audit failures — working papers exist but are not structured per SA requirements, independence confirmations were done informally, or quality control policies were followed but not written down. Firms can significantly improve their peer review outcome by conducting an internal readiness assessment before the formal review begins — reviewing their SQC 1 compliance, updating engagement letters, formalising independence documentation, and ensuring working papers are complete.
A Peer Review is conducted by a fellow practicing CA appointed under the ICAI Peer Review Board programme, and focuses on the firm’s quality control systems and a sample of audit engagements. It results in a Peer Review Certificate (if satisfactory) or a set of observations that the firm must address. A Quality Review, on the other hand, is a post-issuance review of audit reports conducted by the ICAI Quality Review Board — it assesses whether the audit reports issued by the firm are in compliance with standards, and can result in references to the disciplinary committee. The two programmes are complementary but distinct.
