FORM 2
THE PATENTS ACT 1970
[39 OF 1970]
&
The Patents Rules, 2003
COMPLETE SPECIFICATION
[See Section 10 and Rule 13]
TITLE: “METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR PEFORMING AN AUDIT PROCESS”
Name and address of the Applicant:
TATA MOTORS PASSENGER VEHICLES LIMITED of Floor 3, 4, Plot-18, Nanavati
Mahalaya, Mudhana Shetty Marg, BSE, Fort, Mumbai, Mumbai City, Maharashtra, 400001.
Nationality: INDIAN
The following specification particularly describes the nature of the invention and the manner in which it is to be performed.

TECHNICAL FIELD
Present disclosure generally relates to the field of auditing. Particularly but not exclusively, the present disclosure relates to a method and a system for performing an audit process.
BACKGROUND OF THE DISCLOSURE
Generally, audit is performed by a dedicated auditor carrying a laptop and manually entering all the data required for determining a score. The whole auditing process is subjective assessment and scoring will vary depending on the auditor’s experience. Here there are multiple action points which are prone to manual errors and leads to overall wrong scoring and thereby the target score of the vehicle. Existing technologies disclose that the vehicle information is filled in a vehicle resume by a vehicle owner, the vehicle service platform collects the vehicle information and generates an audit task according to the newly collected vehicle information, and the audit task is pushed to the audit task pool. Further, after assessing the vehicle the user updates the information regarding the vehicle and submits the audit task report to audit task pool. Therefore, the current vehicle auditing scheme does not reasonably distribute the vehicle information according to the capability level of the auditors, due to which problems of low vehicle auditing accuracy and low efficiency are caused.
One of the existing technologies relates to a vehicle auditing and control of maintenance and diagnosis for vehicle having an electronic task manual. The task manual includes machine executable task scripts for various tasks that are performed on various systems on an aircraft or other vehicle. The tasks to be performed are provided by the vehicle operator in the task manual and are observed by the maintenance person who provides an assessment result as per his knowledge and observations offline. Therefore, each maintenance person may provide different kind of assessment for a same or similar fault in the vehicle operation, leading to inconsistency. Also, since the existing techniques provide offline mechanism of manually recording the observations, the observations may be prone to human errors and inaccuracies.
The information disclosed in this background of the disclosure section is only for enhancement of understanding of the general background of the disclosure and should not be taken as an acknowledgement or any form of suggestion that this information forms prior art already known to a person skilled in the art.

SUMMARY OF THE DISCLOSURE
One or more shortcomings of the conventional systems are overcome by system and method as claimed and additional advantages are provided through the provision of system and method as claimed in the present disclosure. Additional features and advantages are realized through the techniques of the present disclosure. Other embodiments and aspects of the disclosure are described in detail herein and are considered a part of the claimed disclosure.
In one non-limiting embodiment of the present disclosure discloses a method of performing an audit process. The method includes receiving, by an auditing system configured in a computing device of one or more auditors, an audit input corresponding to a vehicle from each of the one or more auditors. The audit input comprises values associated with predefined input parameters comprising at least one of component name, type of a defect, zone of the defect, a severity level of the defect, and number of occurrences of the type of the defect associated with the zone of the vehicle. The method includes determining a demerit score for the audit input received from each of the one or more auditors, based on one or more predefined rules associated with an audit process, The demerit score indicates an assessment of the defect. Finally, the method includes transmitting to an audit server associated with the auditing system, the audit input received from each of the one or more auditors and the corresponding demerit score for generating audit reports for each of the one or more auditors.
In an embodiment of the disclosure, the audit report comprises one or more actions to be performed to rectify the defect based on the determined demerit score.
In an embodiment of the disclosure, the predefined input parameters further comprise an issue description, information related to a module and a sub-module of the one or more components, and an agency related information associated with the one or more components.
In an embodiment of the disclosure, the type of the defect relates to at least one of design, functionalities, process defects and malfunctioning of the one or more components.
In an embodiment of the disclosure, the method includes receiving a summarized audit report from the audit server. The summarized audit report is generated by correlating the audit input and the corresponding demerit score determined for each of the one or more auditors.

In an embodiment of the disclosure, the method includes receiving one or more modifications performed by the one or more auditors to at least one of the values of the one or more predefined input parameters upon reviewing at least one of the summarized audit reports and the corresponding audit reports.
In an embodiment of the disclosure, the zone of the vehicle may be categorized based on degree of visibility of one or more components of the vehicle for detecting a defect associated with the one or more components.
In another non-limiting embodiment of the disclosure, an auditing system for performing an audit process is disclosed. The auditing system is configured in a computing device of one or more auditors. The auditing system includes a processor and a memory communicatively coupled to the processor. The memory stores the processor-executable instructions, which, on execution, causes the processor to receive an audit input corresponding to a vehicle from each of the one or more auditors. The audit input comprises values associated with predefined input parameters comprising at least one of component name, type of a defect, zone of the defect, a severity level of the defect, and number of occurrences of the type of the defect associated with the zone of the vehicle. Further, the processor determines a demerit score for the audit input received from each of the one or more auditors, based on one or more predefined rules associated with an audit process. The demerit score indicates an assessment of the defect. Finally, the processor transmits to an audit server associated with the auditing system, the audit input received from each of the one or more auditors and the corresponding demerit score for generating audit reports for each of the one or more auditors.
It is to be understood that aspects and embodiments of the disclosure described above may be used in any combination with each other. Several aspects and embodiments may be combined together to form a further embodiment of the disclosure.
The foregoing summary is illustrative only and is not intended to be in any way limiting. In addition to illustrative aspects, embodiments, and features described above, further aspects, embodiments, and features will become apparent by reference to drawings and the following detailed description.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE ACCOMPANYING FIGURES

The accompanying drawings, which are incorporated in and constitute a part of this disclosure, illustrate exemplary embodiments and, together with the description, serve to explain the disclosed principles. In the figures, the left-most digit(s) of a reference number identifies the figure in which the reference number first appears. The same numbers are used throughout the figures to reference like features and components. Some embodiments of system and/or methods in accordance with embodiments of the present subject matter are now described, by way of example only, and with reference to the accompanying figures, in which:
FIG.1A illustrates an exemplary architecture for performing an audit process, in accordance with some embodiments of the present disclosure;
FIG.1B illustrates a brief block diagram of an audit system for performing an audit process, in accordance with some embodiments of the present disclosure;
FIG.2A shows a detailed block diagram for performing an audit process, in accordance with some embodiments of the present disclosure;
FIG.2B shows an image of an input interface for providing audit inputs to determine demerit score, in accordance with some embodiments of the present disclosure;
FIG.3 shows a flowchart illustrating a method for performing an audit process, in accordance with some embodiments of the present disclosure; and
FIG.4 is a block diagram of an exemplary computer system for implementing embodiments consistent with the present disclosure.
It should be appreciated by those skilled in the art that any block diagrams herein represent conceptual views of illustrative systems embodying the principles of the present subject matter. Similarly, it will be appreciated that any flow charts, flow diagrams, state transition diagrams, pseudo code, and the like represent various processes which may be substantially represented in computer readable medium and executed by a computer or processor, whether or not such computer or processor is explicitly shown.
The figures depict embodiments of the disclosure for purposes of illustration only. One skilled in the art will readily recognize from the following description that alternative embodiments of

the system illustrated herein may be employed without departing from the principles of the disclosure described herein.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
In the present document, the word "exemplary" is used herein to mean "serving as an example, instance, or illustration." Any embodiment or implementation of the present subject matter described herein as "exemplary" is not necessarily be construed as preferred or advantageous over other embodiments.
While the disclosure is susceptible to various modifications and alternative forms, specific embodiment thereof has been shown by way of example in the drawings and will be described in detail below. It should be understood, however that it is not intended to limit the disclosure to the forms disclosed, but on the contrary, the disclosure is to cover all modifications, equivalents, and alternative falling within the scope of the disclosure.
The terms “comprises”, “comprising”, “includes” or any other variations thereof, are intended to cover a non-exclusive inclusion, such that a setup, device or method that includes a list of components or steps does not include only those components or steps but may include other components or steps not expressly listed or inherent to such setup or device or method. In other words, one or more elements in a system or apparatus proceeded by “comprises… a” does not, without more constraints, preclude the existence of other elements or additional elements in the system or method.
Disclosed herein are a method and a system for performing an audit process. For instance, a product audit is a type of audit disclosing an examination of a particular product or service, such as hardware, processed material, or software, to evaluate whether it conforms to requirements (i.e., specifications, performance standards, and customer requirements). In another example, a system audit may be conducted on a management system. System audit can be described as a documented activity performed to verify, by examination and evaluation of objective evidence, that applicable elements of the system are appropriate and effective and have been developed, documented, and implemented in accordance and in conjunction with specified requirements. For ease of understanding, the present disclosure is described by considering the audit process performed for a vehicle. The vehicle may include, but not limited to, a car, a truck, a lorry, a bus and the like. The present disclosure envisages the aspect of performing an audit process corresponding to the vehicle. Initially, an auditing system receives

an audit input corresponding to a vehicle from each of the one or more auditors. The audit input may include values associated with predefined input parameters that may include, but not limited to at least one of a component name, type of a defect, zone of the defect, a severity level of the defect, and number of occurrences of the type of the defect associated with the zone of the vehicle. In some embodiments, the type of the defect relates to at least one of design, functionalities, process defects and malfunctioning of the one or more components. In other words, auditing system receives audit inputs from each of one or more auditors involved in the audit process. For example, each of one or more auditors may give different audit inputs related to different components such as engine, steering, and the like. Further, based on the different audit inputs from each of the one or more auditors, the auditing system determines a demerit score. The demerit score may indicate an assessment of the defect. The demerit score may be determined based on one or more predefined rules associated with an audit process. Upon determining the demerit score, the determined score and audit input from each of one or more auditors may be transmitted to an audit server associated with the auditing system. In other words, various audit inputs from each of one or more auditors and the corresponding demerit score that may be determined may be transmitted to the audit server to generate individual audit reports.
In some embodiments, the audit report may include one or more actions to be performed to rectify the defect based on the determined demerit score. Further, the auditing system may receive the summarized audit report generated by the auditing server by correlating the audit inputs and the corresponding demerit scores of each of the one or more auditors.
The present disclosure describes performing an audit which may be a remote assessment. In other words, the audit process is free from administrative consent hassles as any vehicles can be studied and benchmarked. As the audit process is performed using the auditing system that is configured in a computing device of one or more auditors, ease of audit is achieved since computing device can be carried to all different locations. Also, as the auditing system is used by each auditor via his computing device, it may be easier to escalate any issues immediately to stake holders which can help in addressing evolving issues rapidly at all stages of the audit process. Further, the audit reports are generated based on the audit input of each of the one or more auditors and the corresponding demerit score which may significantly reduce the effort of the audit and clearly improves productivity and a common format for report-out decks. The present disclosure indicates demerit score which is determined based on one or more predefined

rules of an audit process, hence ensuring a standardized way of assessing each type of defects. This in turn eliminates the inconsistency in auditing performed by different auditors and enhances auditing accuracy.
A description of an embodiment with several components in communication with each other does not imply that all such components are required. On the contrary, a variety of optional components are described to illustrate the wide variety of possible embodiments of the disclosure.
In the following detailed description of the embodiments of the disclosure, reference is made to the accompanying drawings that form a part hereof, and in which are shown by way of illustration specific embodiments in which the disclosure may be practiced. These embodiments are described in sufficient detail to enable those skilled in the art to practice the disclosure, and it is to be understood that other embodiments may be utilized and that changes may be made without departing from the scope of the present disclosure. The following description is, therefore, not to be taken in a limiting sense.
FIG.1A illustrates an exemplary architecture for performing an audit process, in accordance with some embodiments of the present disclosure;
The architecture 100 includes an auditor 101a to an auditor 101n (hereinafter collectively referred as one or more auditors 101), a computing device 103a to a computing device 103n (hereinafter collectively referred as one or more computing devices 103), an auditing system 105a to an auditing system 105n (hereinafter collectively referred as auditing systems 105) and an auditing server 113. For ease of understanding, the present disclosure has taken the example of an audit process performed for a vehicle, however, this should not be construed as a limitation of the claimed invention, since the audit process can be performed for any other machinery using the same method as disclosed in the present disclosure.
As an example, the vehicle may include, but not limited to, a car, a truck, a lorry, a bus and the like. Further, the computing device 103 may include, but not limited to, a smart phone, a laptop, a tablet phone, personal computer, a desktop and the like. In some embodiments, the one or more auditors 101 may perform the audit process via the auditing system 105 configured in each of the one or more computing devices 103 of each of the one or more auditors 101. In some other embodiments, the auditing systems 105 may be associated with the corresponding

one or more computing devices via a communication network. In yet other embodiments, there could be a centralized auditing system and each of the one or more auditors 101 may use an instance of the centralized auditing system via a virtual environment.
In some embodiments, the auditor 101 may be a user performing the audit process. The audit process may involve inspection and assessment of one or more components of the vehicle by one or more auditors 101. In some embodiments, the one or more auditors 101 may provide audit inputs via the auditing system 101 configured in the one or more computing devices 103 of each of the one or more auditors 101. In some embodiments, the audit input may include values associated with predefined input parameters. As an example, one or more predefined input parameters may include, but not limited to, a component name, type of a defect, zone of the defect, a severity level of the defect, number of occurrences of the type of the defect associated with the zone of the vehicle, issue description, information related to a module and a sub-module of the one or more components, and an agency related information associated with the one or more components. In some embodiments, the one or more auditors may provide values to the one or more predefined input parameters as the audit input by selecting one value among multiple predefined values associated with each of the one or more predefined input parameters. In some embodiments, multiple predefined values associated with each of the one more predefined input parameters may be provided in the form of a dropdown list, a checklist and the like. As an example, when the auditor 101 selects the value as “exterior front” for the predefined input parameter “module”, the component list such as a pillar Bump On Trace (BOT), front bumper, windshield, Daytime Running Lamps (DRL) and the like may be displayed in the form of dropdown list. Further, the auditor 101 may select the component and select the defect type associated with the component (for instance, if the auditor selects the value as “DRL” for the predefined input parameter “component”, then the associated defect type such as “Excess gap between bumper skin to DRL chrome” may be selected by the auditor 101 from the dropdown list).
In some embodiments, when a guest user wishes to perform the audit process, a guest computing device 103 does not have application installed in his/ her device, an auditor 101 who is authorized to use the auditing system 105 may generate a Quick Response (QR) code from his computing device 103. Further, the guest user may scan the QR code and access the auditing system 105. The guest user may perform an audit process, or access audit reports, or modify one or more predefined input parameters as per requirement and the auditor 101 who

authorized the guest user may save the audit performed by the guest user across a guest user ID in a guest folder.
In some embodiments, the auditing system 105 may include, but not limited to, a processor 107, an Input/Output (I/O) interface 109 and a memory 111 as shown FIG.1B. The I/O interface 109 may be configured to receive audit inputs corresponding to a vehicle from each of the one or more auditors 101. Based on received audit input from each of the one or more auditors 101, the processor 107 may determine a demerit score for the audit input of each of the one or more auditors 101. The demerit score indicates an assessment of the defect. The demerit score may be determined based on one or more predefined rules associated with the audit process. In other words, when each one of the one or more auditors 101 selects values for the one or more predefined input parameters as the audit input, the processor 107 may determine a demerit score for the audit input of each of the one or more auditors 101. Further, the auditing system 105 may transmit to an auditing server 113, the audit input of each of the one or more auditors 101 and the corresponding demerit score for generating audit reports for each of the one or more auditors as shown in FIG.1A.
In some embodiments, the audit report may include one or more actions to be performed to rectify the defect based on the determined demerit score. For instance, if the determined demerit score is higher than a predefined threshold limit, then the necessary rectification action can be indicated in the generated report. When each of one or more auditors 101 provide audit input for the same type of defect, a summarized audit report may be generated by correlating the audit input and the corresponding demerit score determined for each of the one or more auditors 101. In some embodiments, the summarized audit report may include demerit score for different audit inputs from each of one or more auditors and the rectification action to be performed. Further, one or more auditors involved in the audit process can make one or more modifications to at least one of the values of the one or more predefined input parameters based upon the summarized audit report and the corresponding audit reports.
FIG.2A shows a detailed block diagram of a method for performing an audit process, in accordance with some embodiments of the present disclosure.
In some implementations, the auditing system 105 may include data 203 and modules 205. As an example, the data 203 is stored in the memory 111 configured in the auditing system 105 as shown in the FIG.2A. In one embodiment, the data 203 may include audit input 207, demerit

score data 209, predefined rules data 211, reports data 213 and other data 215. In the illustrated FIG.2A, modules 205 are described herein in detail.
In some embodiments, the data 203 may be stored in the memory 111 in form of various data structures. Additionally, the data 203 can be organized using data models, such as relational or hierarchical data models. The other data 215 may store data, including temporary data and temporary files, generated by the modules 205 for performing the various functions of the auditing system 105.
In some embodiments, the audit input may be the data corresponding to a vehicle received from each of the one or more auditors 101. The audit input may include values provided by the one or more auditors 101 for each of the predefined input parameters required for performing the audit process. In some embodiments, the predefined input parameters may include, but not limited to, a component name, type of a defect, zone of the defect, a severity level of the defect, and number of occurrences of the type of the defect associated with the zone of the vehicle. Further the predefined input parameters may include, but not limited to, an issue description, information related to a module and a sub-module of the one or more components, and an agency related information associated with the one or more components. As an example, the auditor 101 may select the value as “front bumper” for the predefined input parameter “component name”, via a dropdown. Upon selecting the component name to be front bumper, the auditing system 105 may display type of defects associated with the component “front bumper”. The auditor 101 may select a value as “sync mark issue” for the predefined input parameter “type of the defect”. Further, the auditor 101 may select “high” as the value for the predefined input parameter “severity level”. Thereafter, the auditor 101 may select the value to be “A” for the predefined parameter “zone of the defect” via the dropdown. Next, the audit input may select the value to be “2” for the predefined input parameter “number of occurrences of the type of the defect associated with the zone of the vehicle”. For ease of understanding, exemplary zones of the vehicle may be as shown in below table 1.

Zone of the vehicle Definition
A Surfaces of the vehicle that are located in direct field of view of the driver while driving e.g., steering wheel, Instrument Panel (also referred as cockpit).
A, B, C Vehicle outer skin surfaces divided with respect to field of view or vehicle segment classification.

D Body sections of the vehicle that are covered by flaps.
E Vehicle surfaces that will be covered by attachment parts after final assembly or that have only a minor significance with respect to visual appearance. E.g., engine bay.
Table 1
In some embodiments, the demerit score data 223 may be the data relating to the demerit score determined for each audit input received from each of the one or more auditors 101. In other words, there may be one or more auditors 101 involved in the audit process. The demerit score may be generated for the audit input received from each of the one or more auditors based on one or more predefined rules associated with the audit process. For instance, there may be auditor A, auditor B, auditor C, involved in the audit process. Further, all the three auditors A, B and C may provide different audit input values associated with predefined input parameters comprising at least one of component name, type of a defect, zone of the defect, a severity level of the defect, and number of occurrences of the type of the defect associated with the zone of the vehicle. Upon processing the provided audit inputs based on the one or more predefined rules, the auditing system 105 may determine the demerit score for the audit input of each of the one or more auditors 101. The determined demerit score for the audit input of each of the one or more auditors 101 are based on one or more predefined rules associated with an audit process.
In some embodiments, the predefined rules data 213 may be one or more predefined rules related to the auditing process stored in the auditing system 105. When each of one or more auditors 101 provides audit input to the auditing system 105, the auditing system 105 may map the provided audit inputs from the one or more auditors 101 to the one or more predefined rules stored in the auditing system 105, to determine the demerit score.
In some embodiments, the report data 215 may include audit reports generated for each of the one or more auditors 101. When the demerit score is determined for the audit input of each of the one or more auditors 101, the audit input along with the corresponding demerit score may be transmitted to an auditing server 113. The auditing server 113 may generate individual audit reports for each of the one or more auditors 101 based on their corresponding audit input and the demerit score. The audit reports may include, but not limited to, one or more actions to be performed to rectify the defect based on the determined demerit score. Further, the report data

215 may also include the summarized audit report generated by correlating the audit inputs and the corresponding demerit score determined for each of the one or more auditors 101.
In some embodiments, the data 203 stored in the memory 111 may be processed by the modules 205 of the auditing system 105. The modules 205 may be stored within the memory 111. In an example, the modules 205 communicatively coupled to the processor 107 configured in the auditing system 105, may also be present outside the memory 111 as shown in FIG.2 and implemented as hardware. As used herein, the term modules refer to an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), an electronic circuit, a processor 107 (shared, dedicated, or group) and memory 111 that execute one or more software or firmware programs, a combinational logic circuit, and/or other suitable components that provide the described functionality.
In some embodiments, the modules 205 may include, for example, a receiving module 221, a demerit score determining module 223, transmitting module 225, and other modules 227. The other modules 227 may be used to perform various miscellaneous functionalities of the auditing system 105. It will be appreciated that such aforementioned modules 205 may be represented as a single module or a combination of different modules.
In some embodiments, the receiving module 221 may receive an audit input corresponding to a vehicle from each of the one or more auditors 101 through the auditing system 105 configured in a computing device of one or more auditors 101. The audit input may include values associated with one or more predefined input parameters. In some embodiments, the one or more predefined input parameters may include, but not limited to, component name, type of a defect, zone of the defect, a severity level of the defect, number of occurrences of the type of the defect associated with the zone of the vehicle, an issue description, information related to a module and a sub-module of the one or more components, and an agency related information associated with the one or more components as shown in FIG.2B. As an example, the auditor 101 may select the value as “front bumper” for the predefined input parameter “component name”, via a dropdown. Upon selecting the component name to be front bumper, the auditing system 105 may display type of defects associated with the component “front bumper”. The auditor 101 may select a value as “sync mark issue” for the predefined input parameter “type of the defect”. Further, the auditor 101 may select the value “high” for the predefined input parameter “severity level” via a dropdown or a radio button style on the I/O interface 109. Thereafter, the auditor 101 may select the value to be “A” for the predefined parameter “zone of the defect” via the dropdown.

In another example, the auditor 101 may select the value as “chassis” for the predefined input parameter “component name”, via a dropdown. Upon selecting the component name to be chassis, the auditing system 105 may display type of defects associated with the component “chassis”. The auditor 101 may select a value as “dent” for the predefined input parameter “type of the defect”. Further, the auditor 101 may select the value as “high” for the predefined input parameter “severity level” via but not limited to radio button. Thereafter, the auditor 101 may select the value to be “A” for the predefined parameter zone of the defect via the dropdown.
In some embodiments, the demerit score determining module 223 may determine the demerit score for the audit input received from each of the one or more auditors 101, based on one or more predefined rules associated with an audit process. The demerit score determining module 223 indicates an assessment of the defect. The one or more predefined rules data may be stored in the auditing system 105. When each of one or more auditors 101 provide their respective audit inputs to the auditing system 105, the demerit score determining module 223 may map the provided audit inputs from each of the one or more auditors 101 with the one or more predefined rules stored in the auditing system 105. When the audit input of one or more auditors 101 gets mapped to the predefined rules, the demerit score for the audit input of each of the one or more auditors 101 may be determined by the demerit score determining module 223. As an example, when the auditor 101 selects the value as “chassis” for the predefined input parameter “component name”, the value as “scratch” for the predefined input parameter “type of the defect”, the value as “high” for the predefined input parameter severity level and the value to be “A” for the predefined parameter zone of the defect, the demerit score may be determined based on the values of the one or more predefined parameters, using the one or more predefined rules.
The below table 2 indicates an exemplary demerit score determined based on exemplary predefined rules for a given audit input.

Concern type Safety Zone A Zone B Zone C
Demerit Score 200 50 15 5 1
Assessment Safety issues/ Major customer Average customer Customer observation Process deviation or

legislative complaint/ complaint/ complaint
related issues High TGW Low TGW from trained observer
Response to Stop vehicle Concern Concern Response to concern
the audit shipment must be should be determined locally. To be
corrected on corrected, or considered in my changes,
all vehicles impact reduced facilitates and future models.
Table 2
For instance, when the assessment relates to safety issues/ legislative related issues, the auditing system may generate a demerit score to be “200” based on the audit input of the auditor. Since the assessment is related to safety issues/ legislative related issues and if the generated demerit score is higher than a predefined threshold limit, then a response based on the audit may be provided for instance as “stop vehicle shipment” and then a necessary rectification action may be indicated in the audit report. In another example, when the assessment relates to major customer complaint, the auditing system may generate a demerit score to be “50” based on the audit input of the auditor 101. Based on the generated demerit score, if the demerit score is higher than a predefined threshold limit, a response based on the audit may be provided for instance as “correct customer concern in all vehicles” and then the necessary rectification action may be indicated in the audit report.
In some embodiments, the transmitting module 225 may transmit the audit input of each of the one or more auditors 101 and the corresponding demerit score for generating audit reports for each of the one or more auditors 101 to the audit server. The audit report includes one or more actions to be performed to rectify the defect based on the determined demerit score as shown in below table 3.

Concern safety Zone A Zone B Zone C
type
Demerit 200 50 15 5 1
Score
Assessment Safety Major Average Customer Process
issues/ customer customer observation deviation or
legislative complaint/ complaint/ complaint
related issues High TGW Low TGW from trained observer
Response to Stope Concern Concern Response to concern
the audit vehicle must be should be determined locally. To be
shipment corrected on all vehicles corrected, or considered in my changes, facilitates and future models.

impact reduced
Corrective Check all Implement Implement Depending Observe to
actions in vehicles containment corrective on avoid
products since audit is action on actions to frequency, deterioration
OK. Take build and prevent re- initiate
corrective take occurrence. corrective
actions to
prevent
reoccurrence corrective actions to prevent re-occurrence. actions
Table 3 For instance, as explained in the above scenario of Table 2, when the assessment relates to safety issues/ legislative related issues, the auditing system may generate a demerit score to be “200” based on the audit input of the auditor. Since the assessment is related to safety issues/ legislative related issues and if the generated demerit score is higher than a predefined threshold limit, a response based on the audit may be provided for instance as “stop vehicle shipment” and then the necessary rectification action such as “check all vehicles and take corrective actions to prevent reoccurrence” may be indicated in the generated audit report. In another example as explained in the above scenario of Table 3, when the assessment relates to major customer complaint, the auditing system may generate a demerit score to be “50” based on the audit input of the auditor. Based on the generated demerit score, if the demerit score is higher than a predefined threshold limit, a response based on the audit may be provided for instance as “correct customer concern in all vehicles” and then the necessary rectification action such as “implement containment action on build and take corrective actions to prevent re¬occurrence” may be indicated in the generated audit report.
As there are many auditors 101 involved in the audit process, the audit input which each of one or more auditors 101 provide may vary. Therefore, the demerit score may be generated for each of the audit input provided by the auditor 101 in a standardized manner due to the mapping with the one or more predefined rules. The transmitting module 225 may transmit the determined demerit scores for the audit input received from each of the one or more auditors 101, along with the corresponding audit input, to the auditing server 113 associated with the auditing system 105. When the auditing server 113 receives the audit input of each of the one or more auditors 101 and the corresponding demerit score, the auditing server 113 may generate the audit reports for each of the one or more auditors 101. Further, based on the individual audit report generated by the auditing server 113, the summarized audit report is generated by

correlating the audit input and the corresponding demerit score determined for each of the one or more auditors 101. The generated report or the summarized report may be shared with the one or more auditors 101 via a communication network (not shown in FIG.1A).
Henceforth, the method disclosed in the present disclosure is explained with the help of an exemplary scenario. However, this should not be construed as a limitation of the claimed invention, as this is only for easy understanding purpose.
For instance, there may be auditor A, auditor B, auditor C, involved in the audit process. Further, all the three auditors A, B and C may provide different audit input values associated with predefined input parameters comprising at least one of component name, type of a defect, zone of the defect, a severity level of the defect, and number of occurrences of the type of the defect associated with the zone of the vehicle. Upon processing the provided audit inputs, the auditing system 105 may determine the demerit score for the audit input of each of the one or more auditors. The determined demerit score for the audit input of each of the one or more auditors are based on one or more predefined rules associated with an audit process. As an example, consider the values associated with the one or more predefined parameters provided as an audit input by auditor A as shown in the below Table 4.

Auditor Audit Input
(Predefined Parameter: Value) Demerit Score
Auditor A Component: Outer body of vehicle Zone: Zone A Defect type: Dent Severity of defect: High 15
Auditor B Component: Outer body of vehicle Zone: Zone A Defect type: Dent Severity of defect: low 15
Auditor C Component: Outer body of vehicle Zone: Zone A
Defect type: Malfunctioning Severity of defect: High 50
Table 3

The auditing system 105 transmits audit input of each of the one or more auditors A, B and C and the corresponding demerit score to the auditing server 113 to generate individual audit reports for each of the one or more auditors 101 based on their respective audit inputs. Also, the summarized audit report can be generated from the audit server, the summarized audit report is generated by correlating the audit input and the corresponding demerit score determined for each of the one or more auditors. The generated reports may be sent to the one or more auditors 101 involved in the audit process.
In an embodiment, a Summarized Audit Report (SMR) for a vehicle is provided in tabular form in below Table 5. Table 5 represents the data of a vehicle model sold by a vehicle manufacturer such as a passenger vehicle or a commercial vehicle. The summarized audit report may comprise, but not limited to, the variant of the vehicle, the chassis number, production batch, and colour of the vehicle. The summarized audit report may further comprise the purpose of the audit conducted for evaluation purpose, scores generated based on the evaluation, rectification actions if needed and the identities of the one or more auditors. Table 5 represents the SMR for one vehicle model selected from a batch, an SMR may comprise an audit of one or more vehicles which may be from other production batches. The SMR comprise the classification of modules which is categorized into interior, exterior and under hood, based on its position in the vehicle or the visibility of that particular module from within the vehicle or outside the vehicle. Table 5 represents SMR for modules comprising lamps, engine compartment, luggage compartment, cockpit, steering column, and wiring harness. Sub-module of the Lamps module includes tail lamp, tail lamp camp, Boot lamp, DRL, cabin roof lamp. Sub-module of the engine compartment include fender. Sub-module of the luggage compartment includes rear seat striker. Sub-module of the Steering column includes steering tilt lever. Sub-module of the wiring harness includes Tailgate ass heating cable. Each sub-module of the module and the is assigned with a responsible person who looks after the fitment and further processing of the component relating to the module. The responsible person for cabin roof lamp is Person H. The defect score is provided by the Auditors and a combined score is generated for model A.

Vehicle: Name of the Vehicle with Variant Details
of
Auditor Name Identity No.
Chassis No: 12345 Auditor 1 1111

Color Blue Auditor 2 2222
Purpose Vehicle Maturation Auditor 3 3333
Total Score 114

Classification Module Sub-modules Model A Responsible person Remarks
Exterior Lamps Tail lamp 10 Person A
Underhood Engine Compartment Fender 20 Person B
Exterior Lamps Tail lamp caps 30 Person C
Interior Luggage Compartment Rear Seat striker 10 Person D
Interior Cockpit Hazzard Switch 0 Person E
Interior Lamps Boot lamp 2 Person F
Exterior Lamps DRL 15 Person G 1. Within tolerance 2. Correction done in radiator vertical at supplier end
Interior Lamps Cabin roof lamp 2 Person H
Interior Streering column Streering tilt lever 20 Person I
Interior Wiring Harness Tailgate glass heating cable 5 Person J
Table 5
FIG.3 shows a flowchart illustrating a method of performing an audit process in accordance with some embodiments of the present disclosure.

As illustrated in FIG.3, the method 300 includes one or more blocks illustrating a method of performing an audit process. The method 300 may be described in the general context of computer executable instructions. Generally, computer executable instructions can include routines, programs, objects, components, data structures, procedures, modules, and functions, which perform functions or implement abstract data types.
The order in which the method 300 is described is not intended to be construed as a limitation, and any number of the described method blocks can be combined in any order to implement the method 300. Additionally, individual blocks may be deleted from the methods without departing from the spirit and scope of the subject matter described herein. Furthermore, the method 300 can be implemented in any suitable hardware, software, firmware, or combination thereof.
At block 301, the method 300 may include receiving, by a processor 107 of an auditing system 105 configured in a computing device of each of one or more auditors 101, an audit input corresponding to a vehicle from each of the one or more auditors 101. The audit input may include values associated with one or more predefined input parameters comprising at least one of component name, type of a defect, zone of the defect, a severity level of the defect, and number of occurrences of the type of the defect associated with the zone of the vehicle.
At block 303, the method 300 may include determining, by the processor 107, a demerit score for the audit input received from each of the one or more auditors 101, based on one or more predefined rules associated with an audit process. The demerit score indicates an assessment of the defect
At block 305, the method 300a may include transmitting, by the processor 107, to an audit server associated with the auditing system 105, the audit input of each of the one or more auditors 101 and the corresponding demerit score for generating audit reports for each of the one or more auditors 101.
In some embodiments, the type of defects may comprise, without limitation, Colour mismatch Sink marks, Difficult to clean, Exposed Fasteners, Exposed laser welds, Exposed Spot welds, Gloss mismatch, Grain mismatch, Illumination mismatch, Inconsistent graphic / font, Inconsistent illumination, Material mismatch, Poor gloss level, Poor texture / grain, Split line,

Unpainted shiny-plastic, Visible expulsion holes, Visible injection point, Corner Radii, Flushness mismatch, Gap mismatch, Poor alignment, Poor edge quality, Poor fastener execution, Poor layout / concept, Poor radii quality, Poor routing, Rat hole, See-through, Wide gap, Clicking Noise, Harsh ratcheting sound, Oil canning noise, Poor sound quality / sound spectrum, Poor times structure noise, Popping noise, Rubbing noise, Sound mismatch noise, Tinny noise, Inherent efforts too high - touch Quality, Inherent efforts too low - touch Quality, Lack of precision - touch Quality, Non-slip - touch Quality, Poor feel harmony - touch Quality, Poor fixing - touch Quality, Poor tactile harmony - touch Quality, Slippery - touch Quality, Too cold - touch Quality, Too hard - touch Quality, Too much free play - touch Quality, Too rough - touch Quality, Too smooth - touch Quality, Too soft - touch Quality, Too warm - touch Quality, Touchable ejector pin marks - touch Quality, Touchable ribs - touch Quality, Touchable split line / edge - touch Quality, Travel too far - touch Quality, Travel too little -touch Quality, Travel too quick - touch Quality, Travel too slow - touch Quality, scratches -paint quality, chips -paint quality, dirt in paint (same as body colour), dirt in paint (different from body colour), mottled/cloudy -paint quality, off colour -paint quality, orange peel -paint quality, overspray -paint quality, paint concern-paint quality, blister-paint quality, poor repair (mashing edge)-paint quality, poor repair (polish marks)-paint quality, poor repair (rework on sag / runs / drips / chips / scratches)-paint quality, poor repair (rework after sheet metal parts readjustment)-paint quality, poor sealer application ( saw teeth)-paint quality, poor sealer application ( seal splatter)-paint quality, sags, runs, drips -paint quality, thin paint / dull / dry / ec-fault (clear coat visible, primer not visible)-paint quality, thin paint / dull / dry / ec-fault (primer visible)-paint quality, wet touch / flaw /mar -paint quality, dent / ding, grind marks, poor clinching, sharp edge-biw, stamping marks, streamers / distortion, weld condition (spot condition), weld condition (spot mispositioned), weld condition (stud / screw / pin loose), weld condition (seam burned through/ interrupted / missing), weld condition (splatter)bubbles / ragged, corrosion / rust, cracked, broken, cut damaged, different graining / off colour, sharp edge & flashess, loose, missing part, not seated / retained, over / under, flush (with spec), over / under, flush (without spec), poor adhesive (pu / glazing), poor fit, poorly sewn /weaved, scuff/scratch, severe fit & finish concern, soiled, stress marks, torn, frayed, unequal margin (with spec), unequal margin (without spec), warped /wavy, wrinkled, wrong part
FIG.4 is a block diagram of an exemplary computer system for implementing embodiments consistent with the present disclosure.

In some embodiments, FIG.4 illustrates a block diagram of an exemplary computer system 400 for implementing embodiments consistent with the present invention. In some embodiments, the computer system 400 may be an auditing system 105 that is used for performing an audit process. The computer system 400 may include a central processing unit (“CPU” or “processor 107”) 402. The processor 402 may include at least one data processor 402 for executing program components for executing user or system-generated business processes. A user may include a person, a person using a device such as such as those included in this invention, or such a device itself. The processor 402 may include specialized processing units such as integrated system (bus) controllers, memory management control units, floating point units, graphics processing units, digital signal processing units, etc.
The processor 402 may be disposed in communication with input devices 411 and output devices 412 via I/O interface 401. The I/O interface 401 may employ communication protocols/methods such as, without limitation, audio, analog, digital, stereo, IEEE-1394, serial bus, Universal Serial Bus (USB), infrared, PS/2, BNC, coaxial, component, composite, Digital Visual Interface (DVI), high-definition multimedia interface (HDMI), Radio Frequency (RF) antennas, S-Video, Video Graphics Array (VGA), IEEE 802.n /b/g/n/x, Bluetooth, cellular (e.g., Code-Division Multiple Access (CDMA), High-Speed Packet Access (HSPA+), Global System For Mobile Communications (GSM), Long-Term Evolution (LTE), WiMax, or the like), etc. Using the I/O interface 401, computer system 400 may communicate with input devices 411 and output devices 412.
In some embodiments, the processor402 may be disposed in communication with a communication network 409 via a network interface 403. The network interface 403 may communicate with the communication network 409. The network interface 403 may employ connection protocols including, without limitation, direct connect, Ethernet (e.g., twisted pair 10/100/1000 Base T), Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP), token ring, IEEE 802.11a/b/g/n/x, etc. Using the network interface 403 and the communication network 409, the computer system 400 may communicate with an auditing server 113 and one or more computing devices 103. The communication network 409 can be implemented as one of the different types of networks, such as intranet or Local Area Network (LAN), Closed Area Network (CAN) and such within the vehicle. The communication network 409 may either be a dedicated network or a shared network, which represents an association of the different types of networks that use a variety of protocols, for example, Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP),

CAN Protocol, Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP), Wireless Application Protocol (WAP), etc., to communicate with each other. Further, the communication network 409 may include a variety of network devices, including routers, bridges, servers, computing devices, storage devices, etc. The one or more computing devices 103 may include, but not limited to, a mobile phone, a tablet phone, a laptop and the like. In some embodiments, the processor 402 may be disposed in communication with a memory 405 (e.g., RAM, ROM, etc. not shown in FIG.4) via a storage interface 404. The storage interface 404 may connect to memory 405 including, without limitation, memory drives, removable disc drives, etc., employing connection protocols such as Serial Advanced Technology Attachment (SATA), Integrated Drive Electronics (IDE), IEEE-1394, Universal Serial Bus (USB), fibre channel, Small Computer Systems Interface (SCSI), etc. The memory drives may further include a drum, magnetic disc drive, magneto-optical drive, optical drive, Redundant Array of Independent Discs (RAID), solid-state memory devices, solid-state drives, etc.
The memory 405 may store a collection of program or database components, including, without limitation, a user interface 406, an operating system 407, a web browser 408 etc. In some embodiments, the computer system 400 may store user/application data, such as the data, variables, records, etc. as described in this invention. Such databases may be implemented as fault-tolerant, relational, scalable, secure databases such as Oracle or Sybase.
The operating system 407 may facilitate resource management and operation of the computer system 400. Examples of operating systems include, without limitation, APPLE® MACINTOSH® OS X®, UNIX®, UNIX-like system distributions (E.G., BERKELEY SOFTWARE DISTRIBUTION® (BSD), FREEBSD®, NETBSD®, OPENBSD, etc.), LINUX® DISTRIBUTIONS (E.G., RED HAT®, UBUNTU®, KUBUNTU®, etc.), IBM®OS/2®,
MICROSOFT® WINDOWS® (XP®, VISTA®/7/8, 10 etc.), APPLE® IOS®, GOOGLETM ANDROIDTM, BLACKBERRY® OS, or the like. The User interface 406 may facilitate display, execution, interaction, manipulation, or operation of program components through textual or graphical facilities. For example, user interfaces may provide computer interaction interface elements on a display system operatively connected to the computer system 400, such as cursors, icons, check boxes, menus, scrollers, windows, widgets, etc. Graphical User Interfaces (GUIs) may be employed, including, without limitation, Apple® Macintosh® operating systems’ Aqua®, IBM® OS/2®, Microsoft® Windows® (e.g., Aero, Metro, etc.), web interface libraries (e.g., ActiveX®, Java®, Javascript®, AJAX, HTML, Adobe® Flash®, etc.), or the like.

In some embodiments, the computer system 400 may implement the web browser 408 stored program components. The web browser 408 may be a hypertext viewing application, such as MICROSOFT® INTERNET EXPLORER®, GOOGLETM CHROMETM, MOZILLA® FIREFOX®, APPLE® SAFARI®, etc. Secure web browsing may be provided using Secure Hypertext Transport Protocol (HTTPS), Secure Sockets Layer (SSL), Transport Layer Security (TLS), etc. Web browsers 408 may utilize facilities such as AJAX, DHTML, ADOBE® FLASH®, JAVASCRIPT®, JAVA®, Application Programming Interfaces (APIs), etc. In some embodiments, the computer system 400 may implement a mail server stored program component. The mail server may be an Internet mail server such as Microsoft Exchange, or the like. The mail server may utilize facilities such as Active Server Pages (ASP), ACTIVEX®, ANSI® C++/C#, MICROSOFT®, .NET, CGI SCRIPTS, JAVA®, JAVASCRIPT®, PERL®, PHP, PYTHON®, WEBOBJECTS®, etc. The mail server may utilize communication protocols such as Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP), Messaging Application Programming Interface (MAPI), MICROSOFT® exchange, Post Office Protocol (POP), Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP), or the like. In some embodiments, the computer system 400 may implement a mail client stored program component. The mail client may be a mail viewing application, such as APPLE® MAIL, MICROSOFT® ENTOURAGE®, MICROSOFT® OUTLOOK®, MOZILLA® THUNDERBIRD®, etc.
Furthermore, one or more computer-readable storage media may be utilized in implementing embodiments consistent with the present invention. A computer-readable storage medium refers to any type of physical memory on which information or data readable by a processor 402 may be stored. Thus, a computer-readable storage medium may store instructions for execution by one or more processor 402, including instructions for causing the processor 402 to perform steps or stages consistent with the embodiments described herein. The term “computer-readable medium” should be understood to include tangible items and exclude carrier waves and transient signals, i.e., non-transitory. Examples include Random Access Memory (RAM), Read-Only Memory (ROM), volatile memory, non-volatile memory, hard drives, Compact Disc (CD) ROMs, Digital Video Disc (DVDs), flash drives, disks, and any other known physical storage media.
Advantages of the embodiment of the present disclosure are illustrated herein.
The present disclosure describes performing an audit which may be a remote assessment. In other words, the audit process is free from administrative consent hassles as any vehicles can

be studied and benchmarked. As the audit process is done using the auditing system that is configured in a computing device of one or more auditors, ease of audit is achieved since computing device can be received to all different locations. Also, as computing device is used, it may be easier to escalate any issues immediately to stake holders which can help in addressing of all evolving issues in a rapid way at all stages of a program. Further, the audit reports are generated based on the audit input of each of the one or more auditors and the corresponding demerit score which may significantly reduces the effort of the audit and clearly improves productivity and a common format for report-out decks. The present disclosure indicates demerit score which is determined based on one or more predefined rules of an audit process, hence ensuring a standardized way of assessing each type of defects. This in turn eliminates the inconsistency in auditing performed by different auditors and enhances auditing accuracy.
Referral Numerals:

Reference Number Description
100 Architecture
101 One or more auditors
103 One or more computing devices
105 Auditing system
107 Processor
109 I/O interface
111 Memory
113 Auditing server
203 Data
205 Modules
207 Audit data
209 Demerit score data
211 Predefined rules data
213 Report data
215 Other data
221 Receiving module
223 Demerit score determining module
225 Transmitting module
227 Other modules
400 Exemplary computer system
401 I/O Interface of the exemplary computer system
402 Processor of the exemplary computer system

403 Network interface
404 Storage interface
405 Memory of the exemplary computer system
406 User interface
407 Operating system
408 Web browser
409 Communication network
411 Input devices
412 Output devices

We claim:
1. A method of performing an audit process, the method comprising:
receiving, by an auditing system (105) configured in a computing device of one or more auditors (101), an audit input corresponding to a vehicle from each of the one or more auditors, wherein the audit input comprises values associated with predefined input parameters comprising at least one of component name, type of a defect, zone of the defect, a severity level of the defect, and number of occurrences of the type of the defect associated with the zone of the vehicle;
determining, by the auditing system (105), a demerit score for the audit input received from each of the one or more auditors (101), based on one or more predefined rules associated with an audit process, wherein the demerit score indicates an assessment of the defect;
transmitting, by the auditing system (105), to an audit server associated with the auditing system (105), the audit input received from each of the one or more auditors (101) and the corresponding demerit score for generating audit reports for each of the one or more auditors (101).
2. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the audit report comprises one or more actions to be performed to rectify the defect based on the determined demerit score.
3. The method as claimed in claim 1, the predefined input parameters further comprises an issue description, information related to a module and a sub-module of the one or more components, and an agency related information associated with the one or more components.
4. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the type of the defect relates to at least one of design, functionalities, process defects and malfunctioning of the one or more components.
5. The method as claimed in claim 1, further comprises:
receiving, by the audit system, a summarised audit report from the audit server, wherein the summarized audit report is generated by correlating the audit input and the corresponding demerit score determined for each of the one or more auditors (101).

6. The method as claimed in claim 1, further comprises receiving, by the auditing system, one or more modifications performed by the one or more auditors to at least one of the values of the one or more predefined input parameters upon reviewing at least one of the summarized audit reports and the corresponding audit reports.
7. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the zone of the vehicle may be categorised based on degree of visibility of one or more components of the vehicle for detecting a defect associated with the one or more components.
8. An auditing system (105) performing an audit process, the auditing system (105) comprising:
a processor (107); and
a memory (111) communicatively coupled to the processor (107), wherein the memory (111) stores the processor-executable instructions, which, on execution, causes the processor (107) to:
receive, an audit input corresponding to a vehicle from each of the one or more auditors (101), wherein the audit input comprises values associated with predefined input parameters comprising at least one of component name, type of a defect, zone of the defect, a severity level of the defect, and number of occurrences of the type of the defect associated with the zone of the vehicle;
determine a demerit score for the audit input received from each of the one or more auditors, based on one or more predefined rules associated with an audit process, wherein the demerit score indicates an assessment of the defect;
transmit to an audit server associated with the auditing system (105), the audit input received from each of the one or more auditors (101) and the corresponding demerit score for generating audit reports for each of the one or more auditors (101).
9. The auditing system (105) as claimed in claim 8, wherein the audit report comprises one or more actions to be performed to rectify the defect based on the determined demerit score.
10. The auditing system (105) as claimed in claim 8, the predefined input parameters further comprise an issue description, information related to a module and a sub-module

of the one or more components, and an agency related information associated with the one or more components.
11. The auditing system (105) as claimed in claim 8, wherein the type of the defect relates to at least one of design functionalities, process defects and malfunctioning of the one or more components.
12. The auditing system (105) as claimed in claim 8, wherein the processor is further configured to:
receive a summarised audit report from the audit server, wherein the summarized audit report is generated by correlating the audit input and the corresponding demerit score determined for each of the one or more auditors (101).
13. The auditing system (105) as claimed in claim 8, wherein the processor (107) is further configured to receive one or more modifications performed by the one or more auditors to at least one of the values of the one or more predefined input parameters upon reviewing at least one of the summarized audit reports and the corresponding audit reports.
14. The auditing system (105) as claimed in claim 8, wherein the zone of the vehicle may be categorised based on degree of visibility of one or more components of the vehicle for detecting a defect associated with the one or more components.