Final answer:
The evidence that the cash receipts list totals eventually matched bank deposit totals over time, despite daily inconsistencies, can be considered sufficient, reliable, and relevant. This supports the internal auditor's observation that cash deposits are not deposited intact daily, which aligns with the audit's objectives to assess the organization's cash controls.
Step-by-step explanation:
When evaluating whether the information regarding an organization's cash controls is sufficient, reliable, and relevant for the internal auditor's observations, it's important to consider the quality of the evidence. In this case, the information that cash receipt lists equaled the cash journal entry amounts but did not align with the daily bank deposit amounts, and that cash receipts list totals eventually matched bank deposit totals over time, shows that there is a pattern and consistency in the records. This points to the evidence being relevant to the audit objectives, which is to understand cash controls of the organization. Additionally, if the pattern is consistent over a representative sample, the evidence can be considered sufficient for the internal auditor to draw a conclusion about the daily cash deposit procedures.
However, the reliability of the information might be questionable if cash is not deposited intact daily as per the organization's own policies or standard accounting controls, which generally dictate that cash receipts should be deposited daily. Since the long-run totals align, this suggests that while there may be delays, there don't appear to be discrepancies over time. Therefore, the evidence provided would be sufficent, reliable, and relevant, making option 4 the correct answer.