Summary: The Companies (Auditor’s Report) Order, 2020 (CARO 2020) does not mandate asset tagging through QR codes, barcodes, or RFID technology. Instead, Clause 3(i)(b) requires the auditor to report on whether Property, Plant and Equipment (PPE) have been physically verified by the management at reasonable intervals, whether the frequency of verification is appropriate considering the nature and size of the business, and whether any material discrepancies identified during verification have been properly accounted for. While asset tagging can improve asset identification and streamline verification, it does not by itself ensure compliance or correct inaccuracies in the Fixed Asset Register. A structured physical verification process remains the key control for confirming the existence, location, condition, and accuracy of fixed asset records. Technology supports this process by improving efficiency, but reliable physical verification—not asset tagging alone—is what helps organisations meet the expectations under CARO 2020.
Introduction: As companies prepare for their statutory audits, a common question is whether the Companies (Auditor’s Report) Order, 2020 (CARO 2020) requires fixed assets to be tagged with QR codes, barcodes or RFID labels. The answer is No. CARO 2020 does not mandate asset tagging. Instead, it requires management to establish a reasonable and reliable process for the physical verification of Property, Plant and Equipment. While many organisations adopt asset tagging to facilitate identification and tracking of assets, such tagging is only a supporting tool and not a compliance requirement. The emphasis under CARO is on the effectiveness of the physical verification process and the proper reporting of any material discrepancies, rather than on the technology used for asset identification.
Asset Tagging and CARO 2020: Why Physical Verification Matters More Than QR Codes
Every year, as companies prepare for their statutory audit, one question often comes up:
“Does CARO require asset tagging?”
The simple answer is No.
The Companies (Auditor’s Report) Order, 2020 (CARO 2020) does not require companies to implement QR codes, barcodes or RFID tags on their fixed assets.
However, many organisations still choose to tag their assets before carrying out physical verification. The reason is simple—while CARO does not mandate asset tagging, it expects management to have a reliable physical verification process.
Page Contents
What Does CARO Actually Require?
Clause 3(i)(b) of CARO 2020 requires the auditor to comment on whether Property, Plant and Equipment have been physically verified by the management at reasonable intervals, whether the frequency of such verification is reasonable considering the size of the company and the nature of its assets, and whether any material discrepancies noticed during verification have been properly dealt with in the books of account.
The emphasis is not on technology.
The emphasis is on whether the company has an effective and reliable process for physical verification.
Asset Tagging Is Not Compliance
A common misconception is that applying QR codes or RFID tags makes an organisation CARO compliant.
It doesn’t.
A QR code is simply a unique identifier. If the Fixed Asset Register already contains duplicate records, incorrect locations, disposed assets or missing asset details, adding a QR tag will not correct those issues.
Tagging improves identification—it does not improve the accuracy of the register by itself.
Why Physical Verification Is More Important
The real value comes from a structured physical verification exercise.
During verification, the organisation confirms:
- Whether the asset physically exists.
- Whether it is located where the register says it is.
- Whether the description and serial number match.
- Whether there are any excess, missing or duplicate assets.
- Whether the Fixed Asset Register reflects the actual position on the ground.
Only after this exercise does an asset tag become meaningful.
Without verification, a QR code is simply a label.
With verification, it becomes part of reliable audit evidence.
Technology Supports the Process
CARO does not prescribe how physical verification should be carried out. It neither mandates manual verification nor requires QR codes, barcodes or RFID technology.
The choice of methodology is entirely a management decision.
What matters is whether the process adopted is capable of identifying assets accurately, detecting material discrepancies and providing reliable evidence for financial reporting.
Technology can make the process faster and more efficient, but it cannot replace a disciplined verification methodology.
Conclusion
Asset tagging should be viewed as a supporting control, not as the objective itself.
The real objective is to ensure that the Fixed Asset Register accurately reflects the assets that actually exist.
CARO 2020 does not ask whether assets carry QR codes. It asks whether management has established a reasonable physical verification process and whether material discrepancies have been properly dealt with in the books of account.
In the end, asset tagging doesn’t make an organisation CARO compliant. A robust physical verification process does.
Author Bio
