It seems the accountant did not tie up payments to specific items or receipts which does appear amazing .
It's not amazing. The accountant's role here is to compile a set of accounts and tax return based on the limited information and verbal provided by the proprietors. The fact that they were provided with incomplete records and false representations is not the accountants' fault. It's ridiculous to expect an accountant, engaged to prepare accounts by an incomplete records client, to forensically review & report on all accounting deficiencies within that enterprise. No doubt, if they did, they would most likely be told that they had exceeded the terms of their engagement and their fees wouldn't be paid.
(On a side issue, incomplete records assignments are a major pain for accounting firms. Maybe it is time for accountants to stand up for themselves and refuse to take on substandard assignments. If that happened, an awful lot of people would be left in the lurch.)
. I suppose a request should be made for copies of certifications to see if anything was highlighted there. When the accountant was asked he just said this is all he was given & he just accepted it..
I'm afraid you may be misunderstanding the entire context here. The accountants role here is not to make certifications. How can they - unless they're magicians?
He certainly didn't discuss any issues with the other partner.
Did the second partner not sign the partnership accounts, nor their own tax return? If not, why not? Why weren't they, as partner in the business, failing to exercise at least a modicum of basic financial control within their own business? Why did they never look at a bank statement or a cheque book?
There are serious questions to be answered by both partners here.
Trying to shift blame onto their accountant, or for that matter, their agricultural consultant, merchants or vets sounds from here to be an apparent evasion of responsibility.