Auditors occupy a prominent status, and the expression of opinion made by them should be relevant and unbiased in nature. Whereas, the reputation of an auditor is based on the quality and independence of their nature of work, without making any comprises of any sort, which reflects the potential capability of an auditor to handle several inclement circumstances. However, at the same time, even though the auditors are holding an outstanding image, as far as the public is taken into consideration, if there is any misconduct or malpractices taking place, and the auditor does not report about it, the status so held by the auditors will fell down in a drastic manner. However, sometimes it happens that the auditor himself gives unlawful instructions to the client, as is evident in the Enron case.Instead of being advised to preserve documentation so as to assist Enron and the SEC, ANDERSEN employees on the Enron engagement team were instructed by ANDERSEN partners and others to destroy immediately documentation : (United States District Court Southern District of Texas 2007).The working nature of carrying out auditing work is quite risky. Because based on the expression of opinion and the reports signed by the auditor should become one of the prime evidence in the eyes of Laws and Legislations. In this particular project, it is necessary to make an evaluation of why should the work of audit became a failure as a result of the opaque nature of auditors. Therefore, it is very essential to make a discussion about this matter, it is very important to analyze the fact behind the reason of Enron audit failure causing the shredded reputation of auditors. The fundamental reason underlying such an audit failure is that of its share prices. Because the share prices of Enron were inflated, as a result of this, the stock price movements were adversely affected. Due to this, a subsequent aftereffect took place in the case of Arthur Anderson also.