The phrase "audit took" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used when referring to the duration or time required for an audit to be completed.
Example: "The audit took longer than expected due to the complexity of the financial records."
Alternatives: "audit lasted" or "audit required".
The crisis that destroyed the company months after a glowing audit took just four weeks to unfold.
The national stroke audit took a step in the right direction back in 2001, when it began to include AHPs measures in its stroke care statistics.
His campaign platform, besides calling for the beer-and-pizza audit, took on an anti-regulatory tone, demanding that Georgetown's largest student-run business "remain apolitical" and keep its leadership "separate from the government".
A spokesperson for the Austrian health ministry confirms that the audit took place but says that "nothing interesting or alarming was found" and that the government won't reveal further details.
The audit took place from October 2011 through January 2012 and covered all 10 RSPA maternity units.
Referrals for these disorders have gradually increased since the audit took place, but the reason for the low numbers is unknown.
The report suggests an audit – taking into account the current arrangements, students' needs and the school's goals.
Awareness of the Living Our Values sustainability audit was very low, averaging just 13% of the audience across all three platforms, this despite 55% of the GNM audience considering it important that the audit takes place.
It is the single remaining bidder for a contract to run the South Yorkshire cluster of three existing jails but that has been put on hold while the MoJ audit takes place.
A government audit taken of the company, and of China Southern Power Grid Company, in the past year is reported to have uncovered allegations of corruption including that more than $1bn had been misappropriated while running an electricity grid system.
PWC's letter addressed that issue, saying that while there were cases where it differed with the board's conclusions, "they generally related to the significance of the finding in relation to the audit taken as a whole, and not to the substance of the finding".
