• May
  • 19
  • 2013

Tax Audit in Income-Tax Act-Monopoly of Authority Causing Hurdle for Voluntary Compliance

Posted In CA CS ICWA | | 301 Comments » Print Friendly and PDF

In India, Institute of Company Secretaries of India, Institute of Cost Accountants of India, Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and Bar Council of India are the four professional bodies passed by an Act of Parliament, whose members are engaged in the line of tax practice. They should shed off their own narrow mindedness and come out of their cocoons and think of the country’s interest. Each one trying to desperately fend off others from what they think is their own sacred area.

                Certificate from only Chartered Accountants U/s 44AB introduced in Income-Tax Act in 1984, Since then, CA certificates started entering Income-Tax Act. On date there are 46 plus CA certificates in Income-Tax Act, which is also inherited in draft Direct Taxes Code, 2010. These CA certificates barricade support for voluntary compliance from Non-CA Tax Professionals and new Non-CA Tax Professionals are not entering tax profession. CA certificates are causing strict hurdle for voluntary compliance not only in Income-Tax Act, but also in other Central and State Govt. tax laws (Ex:- In Finance Act, 2012 negative list introduced in Service Tax requiring the assistance of more tax professionals, but number of tax professionals are stand still on date). Tax audit data provided by CBDT has been published in CA Club Website on 16.11.2011. Herein, it is evident that only 59,472 Chartered Accountants are practicing tax law throughout India. There is ceiling of 45 tax audit assignment to be undertaken by each CA, irrespective of Corporates or Non-Corporates. In latest e-filing website of Income-Tax Deptt. only CA’s are treated as Tax Professionals, now existing Non-CA Tax Professionals will also dropout from tax profession and Govt. has to relay on only 59,472 CA’s for seeking compliance U/s 139 of Income-Tax Act.

World over functions of Accounting are classified depending on the area of operation, application and usage. They are as under:-

                Cost Accounts                     >   Manufacturing/Processing Activity

                Financial Accounts             >    Trading Activity

                Management Accounts       >    Management Leval/Decision Making

Management Accounts is nothing but application of Ratio Analysis and Cash Flow Statement on Cost and Financial Accounts.

By The Cost and Works Accountants (Amendment) Act, 2011, name has been changed to “The Institute of Cost Accountants of India” and the members got the power to work in the area of Management Accounts also and can re-designate themselves as ACMA/FCMA. Now, it is funny that both institutes passed by an Act of Parliament called by similar short name of “ICAI”. Of course syllabus is almost similar in all the three institutes called by different name of ICSI, ICWAI and ICAI.

In view of the above amendment, Cost Accountants now possess wide power of working in the area of Cost Accounts, Financial Accounts and Management Accounts. Whereas,Chartered Accountants are restricted to work in the area of Financial Accounts only. This being the case, I do not understand why only Chartered Accountants are authorized to conduct Tax Audit U/s 44AB of Income-Tax Act and enjoy monopoly of authority, causing strict hurdle for voluntary compliance.

———————-

Author  :  B.S.K.RAO, Tax Advocate

E-Mail: raoshimoga@gmail.com


301 Responses to “Tax Audit in Income-Tax Act-Monopoly of Authority Causing Hurdle for Voluntary Compliance”

  1. BSKRAO says:

    WHATEVER ICAI (FINANCIALS) DO, ITS MOTIVE & INTENTION SHOULD BE GOOD. THEN ONLY IT WILL ENJOY NAME & FAME IN THE LONG RUN

  2. Pranay Jain says:

    Dear All ,

    I think all are jealous of chartered Accountants because to become a Chartered Accountant is very difficult if all Other Non CA Professionals have so much issues with CA then they themself should become CA rather Criticizing CA wont help and everybody knows the Level of CA and other Non CA Professionals no further Clarification is required . CA have the Exclusive Domain of Income Tax & Other Tax Laws is a Universal Truth .

  3. Ganesh says:

    Lets see how long it takes for other professionals to represent the clients in courts so that heavy cost paid to advocates are avoided.

  4. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Rahul Nadkarni Sir,

    Your statement “Just wait some time the regulatory exclusivity enjoyed by ICAI will not remain forever” is highly appreciated Sir. I pray god that let it happen at an early date. The statement gives me hope to stay in tax profession Sir.

  5. Ganesh says:

    Mr.Nadkarni,

    You are requested to also read the 2nd para in which the following sentence need your attention:

    “Audit personnel are, therefore, under peer pressure to perform and are likely to cut corners to internally compete with persons who are often not conscious of or bound by the same professional standards”.

  6. Rahul Nadkarni says:

    Dear Balu & Anand
    If the crime of some CAs does not make all CAs criminal in the same logic all the CMAs painted by ICAI are also not incompetent and some CA’s adverse comments on ICAI-CMA does not degrade the CMA profession as a whole. Just wait some time the regulatory exclusivity enjoyed by ICAI will not remain forever. As far as Cost audit is concerned it is ICAI (Accounts) every now and then raises voice for its abolishment. Now when you poke your nose in others matter either in name change issue or relevancy of cost audit, do you expect the counterparty will remain silence? Rather than advising others please show your character and stop this sledging. One more thing please read carefully my last posting on July 22, 2013 at 1:04 PM… Introspect and ask yourself Are all the CAs strictly adheres to the professional ethics ? Again go to ICAI July 13 Journal. Read the article by Y. H. Malegam a candid confession of the profession now these days.. (Pg 66, 1st Para). I agree due to the ineffective leadership in 80’s /90’s and till 2005 ICWAI did not evolve as a force as it should have been at the same time ICAI-Accounts always try to lay down ICWAI coffin as it did not get the cost audit by the statue and Govt. went ahead to create a separate Institute. Now time is changing and do not jump to any conclusion so fast…

  7. Raghav Goyal says:

    Agreed with Balu & Anand saab..

  8. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Rahul Nadkarni Sir,

    Why can’t you people make use of the situation prevailing in the article
    & claim your bonafide rights to conduct Audit U/s 44AB of Income-Tax Act
    through your apex body to remove the hurdle for compliance under Income
    Tax Act, which is also in the interest of our nation. If such authority
    is granted to Cost & Management Accountants, more people will join your
    ICAI course to support for voluntary compliance in all Indian tax laws.
    It is right time, you have to make such claim before your President Sri
    Rakesh Singh

  9. Balu & Anand says:

    Rahul Nadkarni commented:

    To Balu & Anand :
    Yes sir we have seen the quality audit in the form of Satyam scam, GTB fiasco and numerous reported/ unreported financial scams. In the hindsight you will also agree that most of the CAs are hands in glove with the management to present a false picture of the financial health of a company. This portal has bravely reported on numerous occasions the crime of CAs. You agree or not the reality is maintenance of accounts and per se Accountancy as a subject is not a rocket science. The kind of self-eulogize you guys display is laughable. And the hatred towards ICWAI is ignorable.

    Dear Mr Nadkarni

    Like all others here you also seem to be making the same error. You seem to equate one/few person’s misdemeanor or misconduct as a justification for painting all people in that category with the same brush. If that logic is applied then every doctor, policeman, lawyer and teacher would have to be banished from their profession.
    Secondly, all the misconduct and scams where CAs are involved taken together would still not make the CWAs or lawyers eligible to do what CAs can do. There is no guarantee that you guys are above the normal human failings such as greed and lust such that the society can blindly trust you. If I am bad at my job, it would not automatically mean that you are good at it. Only naive people would buy your argument.

    Thirdly, regarding my comment itself, I can assure you that if somebody had asked what difference it would make if a CA were to do Cost Audit or sign a Secretarial Compliance certificate, then my answer would have been the still the same. As a CA, I am not afraid or ashamed to acknowledge another man’s competence and this is where the difference lies between us. You guys seem to have a feeling of inadequacy about your own profession so much that you have to always compare yourselves with a CA. You don’t really need to. Please grow up a little.

  10. Rahul Nadkarni says:

    To Ganesh..

    Go back to history which I came across in July CA journal… it was mentioned that before establishing ICWAI, GOI formed a committee in which then ICAI council members were part of. Now you guys ask yourself what was the necessity to form ICWAI. If the ICWAI has no utility then through your Institute which is much powerful and boast so much arrogance ORDER MCA and MOF to close down ICWAI. Just ponder for a moment and think the real value of Cost and Management Audit will accrue to the society at large not to the Management of Business class. FYI if you refer the “standing committee on finance” comments who heard the name change application of ICWAI.. It was ICAI who vehemently opposed the tag Management as it will create confusion in public. Now the real confusion is there are 2 ICAIs.

  11. Ganesh says:

    Mr.Nadkarni,

    If you go by the few scams which took place in the recent past, then what about the street fights done by the advocates??

    ICAI never tried to get the recognition of other fraternity or the name of other fraternity whereas the ICWAI did it recently. Dont you feel ashamed for claiming something which made you lose the identity?

    Earlier, Cost accountants’ apex body was easily recognizable with the acronym “ICWAI”. But now you have to mention the fact Cost and Management Accountant by including something in brackets….

    Is it not laughable?

    Can you specify instances of cost audit which rendered beneficial to the Government?

  12. Rahul Nadkarni says:

    To Balu & Anand :
    Yes sir we have seen the quality audit in the form of Satyam scam, GTB fiasco and numerous reported/ unreported financial scams. In the hindsight you will also agree that most of the CAs are hands in glove with the management to present a false picture of the financial health of a company. This portal has bravely reported on numerous occasions the crime of CAs. You agree or not the reality is maintenance of accounts and per se Accountancy as a subject is not a rocket science. The kind of self-eulogize you guys display is laughable. And the hatred towards ICWAI is ignorable.

  13. Balu & Anand says:

    “Rahul Nadkarni says:
    July 18, 2013 at 3:05 PM

    What an irony!!! In the name of compliance and statutory obligation even ICWAI has to conduct the audit of its books of accounts by a statutory financial auditor who is a CA. Now do not tell my CA friends that even ICWAI recognizes only the CA’s capability to do statutory audit…. hence they invite the EOI. Its bloody law under which they compel to do so… Not the so called audit expertise blah blah blah…
    If we assume let a Cost accountant be allowed to do same for ICWAI financial audit what difference would it have made…????”

    The difference would have been that between Poor Quality and Proper Quality :-)

  14. Ganesh says:

    A CA Firm which does lots of tax audit of companies need to get its accounts audited by another CA when it is subject to 44AB, and not by its own. When the ICAI has regulatory measures for its members too, how could people expect the IC(W)AI to conduct its audit by a CMA instead of CA which the Income-tax Act prescribes.??

  15. Rahul Nadkarni says:

    What an irony!!! In the name of compliance and statutory obligation even ICWAI has to conduct the audit of its books of accounts by a statutory financial auditor who is a CA. Now do not tell my CA friends that even ICWAI recognizes only the CA’s capability to do statutory audit…. hence they invite the EOI. Its bloody law under which they compel to do so… Not the so called audit expertise blah blah blah…
    If we assume let a Cost accountant be allowed to do same for ICWAI financial audit what difference would it have made…????

  16. CA. M. Lakshmanan says:

    Mr. B.S.K Rao has suggested that “Govt. should definitely think about alternative professionals for tax audit”.Can any one suggest that the Veterinary Doctors can conduct heart surgery of human beings due to shortage of thoracic surgeons?

  17. Balu & Anand says:

    Somebody in this forum commented earlier that the audit of ICWAI is done by Cost Accountants and not by CA’s. Recently, the ICWAI has invited expression of interest for both statutory and internal audits. Statutory audit is to be by CA’s only while internal audit is open to cost accountants.

    This is for general information only and not for raking up any more controversies.

  18. Ganesh says:

    I do not understand why everybody in this blog who talk against CA’s talk only about grabbing the powers of CAs but not ready or not even think of letting the CAs to appear and represent their clients in High Courts and Supreme Courts. Instead of blaming the ICAI which has not witnessed any street fights among its members or students, the people who are really interested public interest should take steps to demand the BCI to regulate its members and students.

    If CA course is so much tough to pass, Govt. should think of requesting the ICAI to extend the ceiling limit of 45 per CA and not about alternative professionals for tax audit. If not, then whatever genuine things happening in this department will go down further to hell which will worsen the present situation. The introduction of CA filing the 44AB report will reveal the real value of CAs in near future.

  19. Raghav Goyal says:

    Sh. BSK Rao ji,

    You are once again misunderstanding the practical implications, here now, of the comments of people favoring CAs.

    The sole purpose to explain the toughness of CA course is to tell you that the work of audit, which is of utmost importance for nation building, has been handled by the most competent persons in India i.e. The Chartered Accountants.

    No XYZ person has been entrusted with such authorizations and powers(like of audit) without having proved himself to overcome the benchmarks set by the INTERNATIONAL BODIES.

    And if you say “If CA course is so much tough to pass, Govt. should definitely think about alternative professionals for tax audit” then I would also request you to write of the President of India to chalk out some easy alternatives to MBBS, MD, MS courses also, because these are also as tough as The Chartered Accountancy course.

  20. Balu & Anand says:

    B.S.K.RAO commented:
    I do not understand why everybody in this blog who talk in favour of CA’s will talk only about toughness of the course etc, instead of wrongful action of ICAI and the issue in question. If CA course is so much tough to pass, Govt. should definitely think about alternative professionals for tax audit. If not genuine tax base in India can not be widened.

    Mr BSK Rao,

    It is not the CA’s who are talking about the toughness of the exams. We have faced it and passed it without whining and are justifiably proud of it. We don’t look down on others who could not make it nor do we grudge anyone more successful than us.

    It is people like you who just cannot digest your own failures who want the Government to dilute the standards. Our country has suffered enough damage already in other fields of excellence with this crazy idea of bringing the standards down to accommodate people who don’t have the necessary merit. So far the Chartered Accountancy and the Armed Forces are the only ones to steer clear of that. Please don’t bring that to the CA field also if you are really concerned about our country.

    You are not fooling anybody here with your tall claims of being concerned about widening the tax base. The very fact that you keep changing your stand about the utility of tax audit shows your ulterior selfish interest in this regard.

  21. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    sir
    to minimize pass percentage in any profession not amounting to TOUGHNESS OF ANY PROFESSION.
    secondly i agree MR. BSK RAO JI govt. should seek other alternative to increase genuine base of tax for india.

  22. B.S.K.RAO says:

    I do not understand why everybody in this blog who talk in favour of CA’s will talk only about toughness of the course etc, instead of wrongful action of ICAI and the issue in question. If CA course is so much tough to pass, Govt. should definitely think about alternative professionals for tax audit. If not genuine tax base in India can not be widened.

  23. Raghav Goyal says:

    Sh. BSK Rao ji,

    I myself tried to clear CA Inter exams but could not clear that even after 5 attempts.
    But I cleared my B.com. and M.com. from A+ accredited university so easily that I could understood the difference between the status and level between the ICAI and Universities.

    After that, whenever, we have to recruit and appoint any Chartered Accountant and any Non-CA in our organization;
    we started asking all of them a same question that;

    WHAT DID IT COST TO YOU TO BECOME A CA or NON-CA(as the case may be)??

    Most common answer from Chartered Accountants is;
    IT COSTED ME MY COLORFUL YOUTH TO BECOME A CA.

    AND;
    Most common answer from a Non-CA is;
    ———–college fees, petrol fee, etc etc and——- that’s all.

    NOW;
    From the comparison of their answers we could understand;
    WHY A CA QUALIFIED PERSON SHOULD BE MORE DIGNIFIED AMONG THE OTHER PROFESSIONALS!!!!!

  24. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Raghav Goyal Sab,

    I am not opposing/commenting any individual Chartered Accountants, but opposing the collective wrongful/unacceptable action of ICAI which are not in the interest of our nation & goes in convenience of its members only. From my article, common man can understand what is what. I do not understand why individual CA’s make personal comments on me ? I think that their inner soul accepts the reality in the article & feel anguish about the issue in question? ICAI should remember that the principle of action and reaction are equal opposite will prevail, whatever may be the power of ICAI.

  25. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    sir
    CA examination controlled by ICAI that is reason you feel CA examination is tough one. reason for it ICAI Wants to give employment at any cost to its members.
    for this purpose ICAI is doing efforts to establish their members in field of law.
    WHICH IS AREA OF ADVOCATES NOT OF CA’S.
    Q. CA examination is tough one to pass.
    Ans. as per BSK RAO have already stated that cost accountant, CS even that B.COM graduate have same syllabus.
    IF CA EXAMINATION CONTROL GIVEN TO UNIVERSITIES WITH SAME SYLLABUS. AFTER THAT TOUGHNESS OF CA EXAMINATION COMPARED TO OTHER PROFESSIONS WILL BE GENUINE ONE.

    In present time if we compare toughness of CA examination with other professions then it will be partiality with other professions, reason other professions examinations are controlled by Indian universities.
    ICAI is single one & number of universities control examination of ADVOCATE PROFESSION. IT IS MAIN DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TOUGHNESS OF TWO PROFESSIONS.

  26. Balan says:

    Venkatesh ji,

    Its the personal life of Rao that has made him post this article. Dont you feel that the article did not emerge from professionalism?

    When he was attempting CA, he would not have shouted for Non-CAs to attest 44AB cases. Now that he couldnt clear, if the power is vested to people like him, then whats meaning of people who have sacrificed their enjoyment period of life to come out of CA exam with flying colors?

  27. C.S.Dinesh says:

    The results of Intermediate level in CA is like the following:

    out of 1,000 students appeared, 30 or 50 passed.

    If those who are not able to pass are allowed to sign the 44AB which the members of ICAI alone are entitled to do so, then what is the fruit which you people are going to give to those who have cleared the exams?

  28. Ganesh says:

    If a person is capable of arguing with many people, will he be allowed to practice law in courts without enrolling as an Advocate??

    Will the fraternity of Advocates let him do so??

    Mr.Rao, kindly think of it before you demand the rights of other professionals.

  29. Venkatesh S says:

    Dear Sir,

    The argument is heading towards personal life of Mr.Rao. It is unfair. If anything is there to discuss it should be about the topic only and not about personal life. Let us show professionalism in our comments.

  30. Venkatesh S says:

    Dear Sir,

    The argument is heading towards personal life of Mr.Rao. It is unfair. If anything is there to discuss it should be about the topic only and not about personal life. Let us have professional in our comments.

  31. Balamurugan says:

    In short, Rao has sent nothing new to blame Balu sir..

  32. Balamurugan says:

    In short, Rao has sent something which was already discussed here… and not new to blame Mr.Balu…

  33. Raghav Goyal says:

    Ok
    This is the reason why Mr. Rao is so opposed to Chartered Accountants.

    Rao sahib, if you could not clear the CA exam and also your son is only a Cost Accountant it does not mean that you LOOSE HEART AND start teasing CAs AND START WRITING TO THE PRESIDENT OF INDIA.

    Rao sahib, if you don’t mind we would recommend you and your son should attempt to clear the Chartered Accountancy exams again and again, which are very-very difficult to pass by an average-man.

    WE REQUEST ALL THE RESPECTED COMMENTATORS ON THIS FORUM TO GIVE GOOD LUCK WISHES TO Mr. RAO AND HIS SIN IF THEY TRY AGAIN and AGAIN TO CLEAR THE CA EXAMS, again, which are very-very difficult to pass by an average-man.

    Thanking you,,

  34. Balu & Anand says:

    Balamurugan commented: in response to B.S.K.RAO:

    “Balu Sir, I have sent detailed discussion & arguments in the matter to your e-mail address, till date you have not responded to my mail ?”

    “Rao ji,

    Why dont you post your arguments here or forward to Ministry, if you really sent them to Mr.Balu & is really yet to be responded ?”

    Dear Sir,

    Let me clarify:

    I received a mail containing the profile of Mr. BSK Rao from which I gathered that he has attempted to do CA but could not cross the Intermediate level. Apart from this I also gathered that he has two sons and one of them has settled in USA while the other wants to become a Cost Accountant. I wish them well and did not find anything to argue about that.

    The mail also contained Mr Rao’s letter to Smt Pratibha Patil, former President of India requesting her to intervene and give Non CAs the power to sign audit reports. The contents of the letter were almost the same as Mr Rao’s article and the subsequent points brought out by him in response to all our comments. In that letter he has also claimed that the businessmen are like ants who will take a deviation when faced with an obstruction and that is why textile businessmen pay in cash for their purchases and sell in cash. They do this mainly to get over the rigours of Sec 40A(3)and because their suppliers in cities don’t accept their cheques. According to Mr. Rao, this clearly proves that tax audit report from a CA is useless.

    I did not understand the relevance of all that and so did not reply to his mail. I thought I will just wait for the Hon’ble President of India to make a move!!!

  35. Balamurugan says:

    Rao ji,

    Why dont you post your arguments here or forward to Ministry, if you really sent them to Mr.Balu & is really yet to be responded ?

  36. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Balu Sir,

    I have sent detailed discussion & arguments in the matter to your e-mail address, till date you have not responded to my mail ?

  37. Balu & Anand says:

    To s/sh Ganesh, Balan, CS Dinesh, Raghav Goyal and all others,

    First let me thank you all for putting up spirited arguments on the issue. But I think it is time for all of us to say enough is enough and go away gracefully. This is because, the people who are making tall claims here are incapable of saying anything logical. Even now, i will not say all non CAs are like this. But the people who make noise here including the author has only made the non CAs cut a sorry figure in front of all sensible people. All of us in fact got a first hand demonstration of how the lawyers manage to prolong a case to keep themselves employed. Raise an argument and when the opposite side answers, they ignore and act as if the real issue is something else.

    This brings us to the CAs themselves. Do we need to prove our credentials in front of these people and do we need a certificate of merit from them ?

    Lets move on to other subjects. Mr BSK Rao did not get into a public argument with me nor did he the courtesy to answer my questions but wanted my mail id for a private talk.
    My email id is balunand AT rediffmail DOT COM. Lets see if he has any arguments in private !

  38. Balan says:

    If something is not fetching any income to you or if you cant do something that fetches more income, you will cry like a child to get those which you dont actually deserve. Thats what most of the Non-CA professionals shouting here.

    Why dont you contest yourself and win in MP elections to go to parliament for changing these laws without any more additional qualifications. (After all, you people want something beyond your means only..)

  39. Ganesh says:

    Mandeep ji,

    If you really have such information which proves the 44AB as meaningless, you should have demanded for deletion from the beginning itself. After shouting for so many days to sign 44AB, you understood that you will not get it anymore and hence you are saying something new now.

    Different HCs give different verdict for same kind of cases. It doesnt mean that one is wrong and the another is right. Everything is based on the information available.

    Furnish the details with you to the Ministry to demand your wish. We will be there to override your information with additional evidence from ourside.

  40. C.S.Dinesh says:

    Mr.Mandeep Singh,

    If you think you have such info, then go ahead. None can / will stop you. Your threats can prevail in someother place but not with CA fraternity. Instead of posting here, you can forward to Ministry itself.

    We will face them. Good luck(?)

  41. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    My friend CA’S,
    I HAVE INFORMATION WHICH IS PROVIDED BY THE DEPARTMENT. IF WE GO THROUGH SUCH INFORMATION THAN SECTION 44AB OF INCOME TAX ACT IS MEANINGLESS.

    I THINK SUCH INFORMATION IS SUFFICIENT FOR MINISTRY OF FINANCE & CBDT TO DELETE SECTION 44AB. WHICH IS COMPLETELY FAILURE TO INCREASE REVENUE OF GOVERNMENT SINCE 1984 AS WELL AS REDUCE BURDEN FROM ASSESSING OFFICERS.

  42. Raghav Goyal says:

    Now, Sh BSK Rao ji,

    You can see that the auditors of even corporates are appointed by the management itself.
    Even then auditors give adverse comments in their audit report against the management.
    And Sh. Balu and Anand have already proved you how these audit reports are used by the department against assessees.

    Thus, with due respect due your profession,
    we request you to take back your words “I WILL DROP OUT FROM PROFESSION”…

  43. C.S.Dinesh says:

    Balu Anand ji,

    Whatever sections you quote is of no use as they themselves realised about their incompetence to get the empowerment. Thats why they are diverting from the core topic every time. It wont be surprise for us if the author or his supporters demand the BCI for the amendment of section 12 of Advocates Act too..

  44. Balu & Anand says:

    Section 12 of the Advocates Act:

    12. Accounts and audit.—(1) Every Bar Council shall cause to
    be maintained such books of accounts and other books in such
    form and in such manner as may be prescribed.

    (2) The accounts of a Bar Council shall be audited by auditors
    duly qualified to act as auditors of companies under the
    Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), at such times and in such
    manner as may be prescribed.

    Only a CA is qualified to act as an auditor under the Companies’ Act.

    Thus, it is now clear that the Advocates Act itself acknowledges and confirms that they are not even competent to audit their own Council’s accounts. I wonder how they are claiming competence to audit other people’s accounts!

  45. C.S.Dinesh says:

    Its is high time that the author needs to quit this profession, not for the words he promised for quoting of instance of 44AB’s importance but for the lack of knowledge he has on the subject.

    But for diverting the cases with prolonged adjournments, assessees may not come to him with this kind of knowledge.

    Except for the Bank/PSU/CAG audits and other Govt audits, all other persons whether Corporate or Non-corporate, private limited or public limited, the auditors are appointed by the Shareholders who are holding major share holding and carrying on the management functions also. So the independence which he meant may not be feasible even in those Corporates too.

  46. Raghav Goyal says:

    Sh BSK Rao ji,

    In regard to your comment on June 18, 2013 at 10:08 AM,

    we think you have again mis-understood the practical applications of acts(here, the companies act).
    Sir, it is true that auditors in corporate sector are appointed by shareholder themselves only.
    But, Practically, the promoters are themselves are major shareholders of these companies. They are also, themselves, the Top Managing Team in such companies.
    Especially in private limited companies…

    And now plz,,, don’t start cursing the Ministry of Corporate Affairs for all this like you are cursing CBDT.

    And also, We would be thankful to you if you could guide us through the following issues:

    1. If yo are saying that the core of the problem in Tax Audits lies in the fact that the Tax Auditor is appointed by the Assessee himself, and this hinders the independence of Auditors;
    then,
    wouldn’t it be enough if the audits are assigned by Income Tax Department itself;
    rather than widening the scope of auditorship among Non-CAs also??

    2. And If, the independence of CAs are affected because of their appointment by the assessee himself;
    then how would you make it sure that the Independence of Advocates or any other Non-CA professional wouldn’t be affected by the same reason??

  47. Ganesh says:

    The author says,

    “if the auditor report wrong claims, next time he will not appoint him again, therefore he will not report wrong claims to enable the assessing authority to conclude quality assessment. This is the scenario prevailing throughout India. This is what I have intended to say & concern of Non-CA Tax Professionals.”

    But he forgot that (leaving the Case No.1 which was converted into Public) the case No.2 quoted about M/s.Caterpillar Commercial Private Limited is a closely held Company wherein the Directors themselves are shareholders who appoint the auditors. Even in this case, there is a possibility of auditor being changed…. So this case must go and fit into the one instance which you and other people were asking for sometime.

  48. Ganesh says:

    First the author said, Since introduction of tax audit in 1984, there is no single instance to show that Deptt. has utilised the same to conclude
    quality assessment. If Deptt. show such instance, I will drop
    out from tax profession.

    Now that Balu&Anand have quoted some instances, He is modifying the query to non-corporate assessees. What a ridiculous argument? You didnt answer the questions raised, but when your questions are answered, you are altering your questions to make it more spicy, but still you are not ready to answer the questions raised by Balu&Anand and other CAs.

  49. Balan says:

    When a child cries for food, everybody with gentle heart may try to feed him/her. But when it ask for something beyond the means, then he/she will be made fasting to understand the practical thing. Likewise, the Non-CAs should be banned from carrying out the audit work so that those who shout here will crave for the existing thing alone and not for 44AB amendment anymore.

    The author and his supporters who claim for deletion of 44AB (who were once claimed the sharing of powers) will soon claim the Govt. to abolish ICAI Act as it is creating hardship for them to get the empowerment belonging to CAs.

    What a funny people!!! They wont do what is required in the Act, but will shout for getting the rights which are specifically restricted to other professionals.

  50. Balu & Anand says:

    BSK Rao says:

    “Balu & Anand Sir,

    All the cases quoted by you are Corporates, wherein auditors are appointed by share holders in the meeting & not by the assesses. I am talking about tax audit of non-corporates wherein management & ownership is vested on the same person. Here the concept of audit itself is wrong. Here if the auditor report wrong claims, next time he will not appoint him again, therefore he will not report wrong claims to enable the assessing authority to conclude quality assessment. This is the scenario prevailing throughout India. This is what I have intended to say & concern of Non-CA Tax Professionals.”

    Raoji,

    This is another one of your shifting track technique when cornered. Nowhere in your article you have made any distinction about corporate or non corporate assessees. Your demand palin and simple is that Non CAs are equal in competence to CAs and as such should be allowed to conduct tax audits. Please be honest to stick on to your original stand and defend it if possible.

    In any case, your argument that is given now is equally devoid of merit. You are casting aspersion on the integrity of all tax payers and CAs. First of all, even the appointment of auditors of a corporate entity other than CAG appointments, are made on the recommendation of the Board of Directors. Therefore, if any non corporate assessee is averse to qualified reports and would remove the auditor for that, then the same thing can happen to a corporate assessee as well.

    Secondly and more important, even if your argument is correct, this does not justify that non CAs should be allowed to sign audit reports. Unless, you are implying that the non CAs would be willing to sign anything to please the assessee just to get the audit work. In that case you could be right !

    But your own integrity is in question now.

  51. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Balu & Anand Sir,

    All the cases quoted by you are Corporates, wherein auditors are appointed by share holders in the meeting & not by the assesses. I am talking about tax audit of non-corporates wherein management & ownership is vested on the same person. Here the concept of audit itself is wrong. Here if the auditor report wrong claims, next time he will not appoint him again, therefore he will not report wrong claims to enable the assessing authority to conclude quality assessment. This is the scenario prevailing throughout India. This is what I have intended to say & concern of Non-CA Tax Professionals.

  52. Balan says:

    Genuine tax base of assessees can be increased by extending the ceiling limit of 45 per CA. This 45 does not cover audit with turonver limit of less than Rs.1 Crore for Business / Rs.25 Lakhs for Profession. When a Non-CA can carryout about 70 cases of tax audit means, the CAs can go for centuries which will be more than enough to extend the tax base. There is no bar in filing the income-tax returns with the aid of Non-CAs for small size business people.

    It is illogical to say that a person who could do business with turonver in Crores is finding it tough to go out of his village to find a CA and hence the need for extension to Non-CAs!!

  53. U.D.VENKATESH says:

    If CBDT wants to retain Section 44AB, it should provide alternative tax professionals for tax audit to increase genuine tax base of assesses. If not definitely it can not widen genuine tax base of assesses to meet international standard of 70% to 80% of population under the tax net, by confining such powers only to scares group of tax professionals.

  54. Balu & Anand says:

    B.S.K.RAO Says:

    “Raghav Goyal Sab,

    As per your argument, let the assessee who maintains the accounts shall do audit also as he is liable for action U/s 277 of Income-Tax Act. Because, assessee appointing & remunerating the auditor to audit his own books will not find any meaning for the word audit. If the Income-Tax Deptt. appoint the auditor to audit the books of accounts of assessee, it has meaning. Auditor should be independent to get the intended results. That is why there is no single instance of utilisation of tax audit report by the Deptt. on date to conclude quality assessment. If you provide me one such proof, I will drop out from the profession.”

    Dear Sri BSK Rao,

    I am herewith giving you 5 decisions wherein the Audit Report u/s 44AB together with Form 3CD has been utilized by the Department. These are cases, that I remembered off-hand as soon as i saw your comment. There would be many more. I am giving below, what the Honourable jdges/ members have also remarked on this issue together with the Case number and Citation wherever available.

    You asked for 1 case and I have given you 5 cases. Now, I do not really wish to see you drop out of the profession. Please continue and may you, Mandeep Singh, Prashant and all others also prosper. We have absolutely no problems about that. But kindly stop this nonsense and accept that there are professions with different abilities and expertise. You wrote an article that is untenable and when challenged, the only thing you do is either disappear or change track.
    Here are the cases:

    1. M/s MIND TREE LTD (FORMERLY M/S MINDTREE CONSULTING (P) LTD) Vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BENCH ‘B’ BANGALORE
    ITA No.678/Bang/2010

    This stand of the CIT goes without saying the impartiality and forthrightness on the part of the CIT; The CIT took a view that since the auditor in Col.17 (k) of Form 3CD had remarked to the effect that the said sums represent liabilities of contingent nature and as such the assessee was not entitled to claim such claims as allowable. ————- In the interests of natural justice and equity the issue is remitted back on the file of the AO with specific directions to look into the contentions put-forth by the assessee and to take appropriate action in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

    2. M/s. Caterpillar Commercial Private Limited (Now merged with Caterpillar India Private Limited), Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle I(3),

    CHENNAI
    8. We have heard both sides, perused the orders of lower authorities and materials available on record. The Assessing Officer completed the fringe benefits tax assessment under section 115WE(3) on 31.12.2009 determining the taxable fringe benefits at Rs. 9,26,41,272/- as against Rs. 1,84,89,642/- returned by the assessee in its return of fringe benefits. While computing the taxable fringe benefits, the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 7,41,51,630/- towards privilege provided free of cost falling under the purview of section 115WB(1)(a) stating as under:

    “2. On verification of the audit report in Form 3CD , the statutory auditors M/s. Price Water House, Chartered Accountants, Chennai had described in Schedule 5, the nature of payments made to persons specified u/s. 40A(2)(b). It elaborates that an amount of Rs. 7,41,51,630/- has been paid to its holding company M/s. Caterpillar Inc. in respect of the shares of M/s. Caterpillar Inc. allotted free of cost to the Director and employees who are presently on deputation with the assessee company. The value of any benefit provided by the employer to its employees by way of allotment of shares, debentures, or warrants directly or indirectly under any Employees Stock Option Plan or Scheme of the company is a fringe benefit within the meaning of clause (a) of 2005 issued by the CBDT, in the absence of a proper computation provision in respect of such benefits, the charging section fails. However, in the instant case, the assessee itself has computed and provided the value of such benefits passed on to the employees free of cost. Therefore, the value of such benefits is liable to FBT.

    The Appeal is dismissed.

    3. (2008) 26 SOT 216 (MUMBAI) ACIT vs Time Packaging Ltd. MUMBAI ‘K’ BENCH

    3.6 In the case under consideration, the contention of the assessee is that the assessee has given effect to section 145A in accordance with above discussion. The learned AR in support of that filed a chart and demo-nstrated accordingly. Such detailed working is also given in tax audit report as required in clause 12(b) of Form 3CD . But above submissions of Ld. AR and deduction under section 43B in accordance with above discussion are subject to verification, therefore, we send the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for limited purpose to verify the facts of the case of assessee in the light of above discussion and calculate the amount of addition, if any, accordingly.

    4. In the result, the appeal of the revenue is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

    4. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs INDIAN FARMER FERTILISERS COOP LTD
    ITA Nos.3350/Del./2009 &1194/Del./2011 DELHI BENCH

    Para 5.
    From the tax audit report, we also find that amount of Rs13,03,74,047/- has been shown as paid on or before due date for furnishing return of income for the previous year u/s 139(1) of the Act. Form 3CD has been prepared and signed by Rajnish & Associates, CA. The accounts of the assessee have been audited by statutory auditors. The assessee had filed the details of payment of Rs.13,03,74,047/-. The assessee is entitled for deduction u/s 43B of the Act in respect of amount of Rs.13,03,74,047/-. Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the CIT(A) deleting the addition made u/s 43B of the Act.

    5. (2001) 73 TTJ 28 (CALCUTTA) Deputy CIT v. Telelink Nicco Ltd. KOLKATA ‘E’ BENCH

    Unless, there is information about the agreement governing such loan and further information to the effect that the interest has become payable during the year under consideration, provisions of section 43B(d) cannot be invoked. In the instant case no information was there on the record of the assessing officer in the form of terms of conditions of the loan agreement nor the tax audit report under section 44AB in Form 3CD had remarked or indicated that the amount had become payable during the year under consideration, but not paid, but there was a clear noting in Annexure V enclosed with Form 3CD -column 7, that in terms of letter of ICICI, dated 12-7-1989, interest amount due upon 20-6-1989, was deferred. Thus, the assessee was not required to pay the interest in terms of deferment allowed by ICICI, thereby modifying the terms and conditions of its loan agreement ICICI, thereby modifying the terms and conditions of its loan agreement

    9.2. Thus, on the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that, without any material on this aspect of payability of interest dues, the assessing officer was not entitled in invoke the provisions of section 43B(d) to form part of prima facie adjustment meriting disallowance of deductions, without having regard to the terms and conditions of the loan agreement deferring the payability of interest. On the other hand, we can safely conclude that in view of clear noting in Annexure V of Form 3CD , column 7, regarding fact of deferment of interest, the assessing officer should have allowed the interest debited to profit & loss account instead of invoking section 43B(d). This being the fact of the case, we do not hesitate to hold that as on 31-3-1989, there was no payability of interest amount deferred by ICICI.

  55. B.S.K.RAO says:

    TO BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA

    It is requested to delete the words “or in any other law” from Section 33 of Advocates Act & direct CBDT adhere to the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Bar Council of India Vs A.K.Balaji. On the strength of this Apex Court verdict, BCI should ensure that only Advocates appear before the Income-Tax authorities at all levels. Further, it will also give boost to our fight against repressive policies of Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Corporate Affairs & Central Board of Direct Taxes, which are in convenience of ICAI, ignoring nation’s revenue interest.

  56. SRIKANT S.RAO says:

    In this computer era, even RBI has fixed limit of Advances exceeding Rs 20 Crore for audit of bank banches. I do not understand why CBDT is still hanging around Rs 1 Crore for tax audit U/s 44AB of Income-Tax Act, that too auditors are appointed & remunerated by assesses which finds no meaning for the word Audit.

    Section 44AB is a highly controversial section & trouble some to attract compliance under Income-Tax Act requiring deletion in future. Therefore CBDT should make analytical study of the same by forming a committee to examine why India only little over 2% of population are under tax net

  57. Balan says:

    U.D.V. Sir, its the Income-tax Act which specifically restricts the signing functions to CAs only. You cant say that there is no jurisdiction for prohibiting Advocates to issue certificate or Reports in Income-Tax Act. Empowering CAs only to sign is given by the legislature and to grab that right only you are shouting here.

  58. Balan says:

    If the presumption of Mr.U.D.Venkatesh is accepted, then The Chartered Accountants Act need to be amended as follows:

    After the words “Practice of Accountancy”, the words “and Practice of law” to be inserted. After this, it will be PRESUMED that the CAs possess the eligibility to represent their clients in the High Courts and Supreme Courts……

  59. K.MUKAMBIKA says:

    When ICAI claim that it is their prerogative to Audit with the limitation to Financial Accounts only in their statute book, why can’t Legal Practitioners claim that it is the prerogative to practice Income-Tax law with the backing of latest SC & HC verdict and Advocates Act, 1961

  60. U.D.VENKATESH says:

    LEGISLATURE PROVIDED SPECIAL CLASS OF PERSONS IN ADVOCATES ACT TO PRACTICE LAW AND HENCE APPEARANCE CLAUSE U/S 288(2) NOT REQUIRED IN INCOME-TAX ACT.

    Even holding Section 288(2) appearance clause required in statute book of Income-Tax Act, following points should be considered by CBDT to authorize Legal Practitioners to sign off Certificates/Reports in Income-Tax Act:-

    1. Legal Practitioners are also authorized to prepare return of income & represent assesses U/s.288(2) of Income-Tax Act read with Rule 12A. Rule 12A inserted by Notification No.2029 Dt.13.6.1962, require Legal Practitioner covered U/s 288(2) to furnish report on the examination of assesses account books & documents in the assessment proceedings.

    2. When Legal Practitioners are authorized to prepare return under 12A of Income-Tax Rules, it is presumed that such persons possess knowledge of Income-Tax law read with accounting principle prescribed U/s 145 of Income-Tax Act. Information to be furnished in Certificates/Reports under Income-Tax Act amounts to practice of law as it require interpretation of law more & basic accounting knowledge sufficient.

    3. Audit means verification, depending on the purpose they are classified as Energy Audit, Environment Audit, Product Audit, Process Audit, Pollution Audit, Legal Audit in USA & Tax Audit in Indian Income-Tax Act. Here, person conducting audit should be specialized in that subject. Hence the word “Audit” is not the domain of Chartered Accountants. Assessing authorities in Income-Tax Deptt. who conduct audit in assessment proceedings are not Chartered Accountants. In conclusion, person specialized in Income-Tax law should issue Certificates/Report under Income-Tax Act.

    When Legal Practitioners are the only class of persons entitled to practice law U/s 29 of Advocates Act, 1961 there is no justification for prohibiting them to issue certificate or Reports in Income-Tax Act.

  61. B.S.K.RAO says:

    TO CBDT/MINISTRY OF FINANCE,

    Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India should understand the present situation of monopoly of authority causing strict hurdle for voluntary compliance in Income-Tax Act & provide alternative professionals for tax audit in order to widen genuine tax base of assessees. This is purely in the interest of nation.

  62. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    SIR
    I HAVE EARLIER IN MY COMMENTS EXPLAINED THAT WORD ” APPEARANCE” & WORD “PRACTICE OF LAW” BOTH DIFFERENT TO EACH OTHER.
    MY CA FRIENDS ALWAYS MIXED TO BOTH. APPEARANCE BEFORE ANY AUTHORITY NOT TO AMOUNTING TO PRACTICE OF LAW.
    REGARDING THIS NUMBER OF JUDGEMENT’S EXIST.

  63. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Raghav Goyal Sab,

    As per your argument, let the assessee who maintains the accounts shall do audit also as he is liable for action U/s 277 of Income-Tax Act. Because, assessee appointing & remunerating the auditor to audit his own books will not find any meaning for the word audit. If the Income-Tax Deptt. appoint the auditor to audit the books of accounts of assessee, it has meaning. Auditor should be independent to get the intended results. That is why there is no single instance of utilisation of tax audit report by the Deptt. on date to conclude quality assessment. If you provide me one such proof, I will drop out from the profession.

  64. Raghav Goyal says:

    Sh. BSK Rao ji,

    First off all we appreciate Sh. Balu & Anand for perfect interpretation of both of the Acts.

    Secondly, I think you have misunderstood the practical application of the Income Tax Act.
    In regard to your post on June 14, 2013 at 8:31 PM, we think the following points should be brought in the light;

    1. You are absolutely right to say that sole responsibility of a CA is to prepare audit report and not to prepare Income Tax returns of the assessees.

    2.But you have mis-understood the piratical aspect that;
    a) even advocates are also not authorized to prepare Income Tax returns of any assessee.
    b) preparation of Income Tax return is the sole responsibility of the assessee alone.

    3) This could be understood form the point that only assessee (or his authorized representative) can sign on the Income Tax return.

    4) However, an assessee can ask anybody to assist him/her in preparation of Income Tax return.
    And thus, when an assessee goes to any CA’s office or advocate’s office and
    ask his him to prepare the Income tax return then;
    TECHNICALLY;
    he is actually asking him to ASSIST HIM IN PREPARATION ON INCOME TAX RETURN.

    Thus, it is very much wrong to admit that CAs should prepare Audit report and hand over it to an advocate to prepare Income Tax return.

    That’s all…

  65. Balan says:

    Mr.Rao,

    You are welcome to challenge in the Court of law. Go ahead and we are ready to face it.

  66. Balan says:

    Rao sir,

    I hope you are not following the LIFO method atleast in the Books of Accounts of your clients. You people keep on raising queries without answering those raised by Balu Anand & other CAs.

    Is this the way you people argue – instead of answering first, you keep on counter querying the opponent and thus divert the core subject. In the end, you demand the answers for your questions without responding to any of our Questions.

    Even CAs are allowed to sign only 45 tax audit cases, Who gave you powers to carryout the audit of 70 tax audit cases?? Have you ever thought that you are eating the fruit of someother Non-CA??

  67. Ganesh says:

    Raghav ji,

    I dont want the extension of powers to Non-CAs. I just meant to say that because of their inability, they are shouting here to gain your powers without any difficulty of passing through the exam.

    Also, the statistics of 59,472 CAs practising is incorrect. People who think so need to check the ICAI website which shows that about 82,000 members are practising the profession of CA.

  68. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Strictly speaking & based on the role given to Advocates & CA’s in their
    statute, practice of Income-Tax law should go as per the below procedure

    1. CA’s should prepare accounts & final accounts along with audit report
    should be handed over to Advocates.
    2. Advocates should prepare the Statement of Total Income, prepare the
    return & upload it in the Income-Tax Website.

    If the above procedure is not followed, it may be challenged in the court
    of law with the backing of Advocates Act & recent court verdicts.

  69. Balu & Anand says:

    Dear BSK Raoji,

    Thanks for making an appearance although you are not answering my questions. But why should I disappoint you? You want me to comment on Sec 29 of the Advocates Act and Section 32 of the CA Act. Certainly…

    First and foremost it is not Section 32 of the CAs Act but Sections 32 and 33 of the Advocates Act that all of you should be reading and digesting. For your benefit, I am reproducing that below:

    32. Power of Court to permit appearances in particular cases.—

    Notwithstanding anything contained in this Chapter, any court, authority, or person may permit any person, not enrolled as an advocate under this Act, to appear before it or him in any particular case.

    33. Advocates alone entitled to practise.—Except as otherwise provided in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force, no person shall, on or after the appointed day, be entitled to practise in any court or before any authority or person unless he is enrolled as an advocate under this Act.

    Can you understand the meaning of the above sections?

    Sirji, your own precious Advocates Act, on which you have all been hanging about, provides that a court or ANY AUTHORITY may permit any other person to appear before it even if such a person is not an advocate. From CBDT down to an Income tax Inspector are all “Authorities’ under the Income tax Act, whhich is also a duly passed law by the parliament. This is Section 32 in Chapter IV of your Act. Please note this section opens with the words, “Notwithstanding anything contained in this Chapter” meaning it overrides your Section 29 also which too is part of Chapter IV of the Advocates Act.

    Now, take Section 33…

    This section goes on to provide that no person shall practice law before any court or authority unless he is enrolled as an advocate “Except as otherwise provided in this Act OR IN ANY OTHER LAW FOR THE TIME BEING IN FORCE…..”

    Since the Income Tax Act is very much a Law which is in force for the time being, and that law allows a CA to appear before any authority or Tribunal, you claim fails. No further proof is necessary now that you people can neither understand law nor accounts.

    Please go back to your elementary law books and understand the contents of your own Advocates Act.

  70. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Balu & Anand says:

    I hope you will at least reply to me and not vanish like the author of this article.

    MANDEEP SINGH says:

    SIR PL READ SECTION 29 OF ADVOCATE ACT 1961 & SECTION 32 OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT ACT 1949. THESE SECTION WILL CLEARLY EXPLAIN YOU AREA OF CA’S.

    What Mandeep Sing Says, can not be disputed. Because Section highlighted by the him clearly indicates the role of respective professionals. Therefore, kindly give answers to his question & then divert the topic with the above statement.

  71. Prashant says:

    To Mr. Balu & Anand
    The gist of our argument is exactly what you claim rather believe that only and only CAs are well equipped to do financial and tax audit. You cannot get out of the confusion till the time you recognize that those undertake CWA and CS course also capable enough to do so. Why do you forget that in tier 2 -3 cities I can say at least 10-15 years back when there were not enough Cost Audit and Company secretary firms students pursuing CWA and CS courses were joining CA firms to do petty audit assignments just to get an exposure into practical audit like any CA article clerk. Alas they disappoint soon with the kind of experience. If you are true you will agree that this is the opinion of most CA students in their article ship. Now the Exam pattern which CAs claims is the toughest and the mindless argument that Non-CAs cannot pass it hence the grumbling. Can you say that you have found easily to pass out Non-CA exams like CWA and CS.? In my personal experience I found CA course is rather easy than CWA especially CWA final atleast 12 years back. So please do not generalize things. It depends on person to person. What I said in my previous comments those having multiple qualification cannot undermine other professions, doubt their professional capability but give equal respect. The 3 yr article ship which CAs claim is the base of their expertise is nothing but a time pass. To remove your confusion I had already posted that the need of the hour is open up the financial audit / tax audit arena to CWA and CS and let us see how these guys fare. The so called myth created by ICAI that only CA as a superior knowledge class be allowed to conduct financial and tax audit will soon disappear. Can CAs agree? Now tell me how many times ICAI acted promptly against its erring members. In what time they took action against Satyam auditors till the time MCA gave a piece of their mind. Please find in this web site the number of times CAs are caught red handed taking bribe, arrested by CBI etc.. Recently it was reported that ICAI took action against its member for marrying twice . Please understand Non-CAs are nothing to lose but gain once they are allowed to conduct financial and tax audit and public at large will have an option.The fear allowing others will be risky as audit is a high skill job is unwarranted.Unless you allow others (CWA and CS) how can ICAI claim ? But CAs will definitely feel the heat hence the vehement opposition, degradation against Non-CAs

  72. Raghav Goyal says:

    Sh. Ganesh Ji,

    Do you want to say that;
    the authorities entrusted upon CAs should be given to Advocates also;
    mere because;
    the CA exams;
    as compared to LLb exams;
    are so tough that an ordinary person is not able to come up to the level of such exams.
    And the level of people who have been able to pass these CA exams is above average???

    Is this the reason you are putting forth for delegation of authorities to advocates also???

    If yes;
    then tomorrow advocates would rise and say;
    My Lord, clearing MBBS and MD and MS exams are very tough for an average person;
    but passing LLb exams is very-very easy for an average person;
    and thus,
    we, the advocates; should be give authority to do surgeries and operations of human bodies also….

    Am I right???

  73. C S Dinesh says:

    Supposing the Advocates Act is amended to say that advocates shall practice of law only in HC/SC, are you people going to curtail your work to that only.???

    Then What way you say that income tax is law, so only advocates to practice it???

    The Incometax Act has specifically excluded you to carryout the attest function for 44AB. You will claim first, if you dont get means you will demand abolition, if you still cant get means you will question about the preamble of the Act itself?????? it goes on prolonging sir without getting anything to anybody like the 3 crore pending cases (Atleast you will get good consideration at the expense of your clients there)….

  74. C S Dinesh says:

    If section 29 of the Advocates Act empowers only advocates to practice law, then you do practise of law only. Why are you coming to audit the books of accounts of assessees.

    Section 32 of the Chartered Accountants Act is to enable the accountants enrolled before commencement of this Act to practice the profession of accountancy and not the new born baby of last decade. The said section automatically restricts the entry of new people.

    Now tell me whether your area is in and around Courts / forums to argue for clients or in and around roadside to do rowdeesm and destroy the peace of general public.. When so many cases are pending in courts, you must be having ample scope in your profession. But still you want to come into 44AB means you are welcome to apply, appear in exam and pass the CA if you are capable of doing so………..

  75. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    DEAR CS DINESH JI
    1) CAN YOU TELL ME INCOME TAX ACT IS A LAW OR STORY BOOK ?
    2) WHAT IS MAIN OBJECT TO ESTABLISH ICAI?
    3) CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS ARE ONLY QUALIFIED ACCOUNTANTS NOT LAW
    PROFESSIONAL & I THINK,YOU ARE VERY WELL KNOWN WHAT IS WORK
    OF ACCOUNTANTS .
    EXCEPT THIS MAIN OBJECT OF ADVOCATE PROFESSION PRACTICE OF LAW & CA PROFESSION PRACTICE OF ACCOUNTANCY.

    SIR IF INCOME TAX IS NOT A LAW, THEN U R RIGHT APPEARANCE BEFORE IT DEPARTMENT IS YOUR AREA. IF IT IS A LAW THAN YOU ARE WRONG, IT IS AREA OF ONLY ADVOCATES.

    SIR PL READ SECTION 29 OF ADVOCATE ACT 1961 & SECTION 32 OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT ACT 1949. THESE SECTION WILL CLEARLY EXPLAIN YOU AREA OF CA’S.

  76. Ganesh says:

    Raghav Sir,

    The door is opened to everybody by fixing the qualification limit of “Pass in 12th standard” to get into the CA course. But getting out of the course with the degree takes a heavy toll on every student. Thats why people here want the extension of exclusive rights of CAs to them also.

    Whatever argument or appeal they make in this forum or any other forum or parliament, for that matter, your fraternity need to face the obstacles and come out with full fruit which was entrusted to you 3 decades back.

  77. C.S.Dinesh says:

    Its not the Income tax department that needs the wake-up call. Its the BCI which needs to wake-up to regulate its members from damaging the council’s name which were mentioned in this forum. Not only ICAI, even IC(M)AI, ICSI and IAI are keeping the status of their profession by not indulging in activities mentioned in some of the links of Balu&Anand.

    If this matter is taken up to the Parliament, still the CA fraternity will come up with the whole cake with the exclusion of others. There are so many cases which are not covered under 44AB. Then how could many here, talk about monopoly authority. If advocates act is specifically passed for Advocates means you do the arguments in courts, and NOT in I.T.Department or its territory which reserves the rights only to CAs.

  78. CA.PRAVINKUMAR.A says:

    We have crossed the huddles put-forth by the ICAI in examinations to get the membership of the institute. If your dictionary states that this is arrogancy, then only thing we can say is that we deserve to get such arrogant status of eliminating other people from the rights given to the ICAI members.

  79. Balu & Anand says:

    Dear Prashant

    Go ahead and get into a debate. No CA is going to run away from a challenge or debate like Mr BSK Rao.

    But I am confused about why you want the CAs to substantiate why only they are the experts. That fact is already recognized by law itself and that is precisely what you are all howling about. Therefore the onus is on you to prove, how the Non CAs are as good as the CAs.

    As far as the scams are concerned, one assumes that you are knowledgeable enough to understand that they are cases of individual misconduct and professional negligence. The scams by themselves don’t make you or any non CA competent to do the audit. That would be like saying I am competent to do surgeries just because there are many instances of doctors leaving needles or scissors inside the body of the patient after the surgery or operating on the wrong organ. The ICAI has its own penal measures and these are imposed harshly and there are investigating agencies as well to bring the culprits to book. The criminals will be anyway defended by the lawyers so I don’t think you can have much objections to that !

    Now, please cajole Mr BSK Rao to take my challenge and get into a public debate.

  80. Prashant says:

    The tom tomming of CAs about their profession and ridiculing others when something remotely associated to accounts/tax law/ finance in which non-CAs raise their voice is not new and surprised. They want the present status quo to remain forever. Dear Non-CAs do not waste your time and energy arguing with likely minds such as Balu & Anand. I challenge in this forum to substantiate his reason that only CAs are better equipped to conduct Financial and Tax audit etc…And I can prove how this practice have land the nation in deep trouble in terms of monumental financial scams and colossal revenue loss to the exchequer A fool can only live in Paradise. Now some self claimed and enlightened CAs comment that a qualified Cost Accountant finds it tough to pass Inter CA. What a laughing stuff?? Did not it prove the arrogant mind set of some of these professionals?

  81. Raghav Goyal says:

    Even there is a book on the LIFE OF A CA STUDENT. Go to the following link:

    taxmann.com/bookstore/bookmann-india/life-of-a-ca-student-40-pass-but-49-fail.aspx

  82. Balu & Anand says:

    M.N.NAGESH Says:
    C.S.Dinesh Sir,

    I think, Advocates are not claiming power to sign tax audit report, instead seeking deletion of Section 44AB from Income-Tax Act for genuine reason that it is causing strict hurdle for voluntary compliance due to monopoly of authority granted to CA’s & also contrary to Advocates Act. Ie, Advocates alone entitled to practice law, because of the Section 44AB Advocates are required to bow down before CA’s which is against word “Noble Profession”. By latest, Bar Council of India is taking necessary steps in the matter.

    Aha, so now it has become a question of ego. The advocates don’t want to “bow down” before anyone because they alone are noble. Mr Nagesh, Can you please explain in what way the doctors, teachers, soldiers, CAs, CSs etc are less noble? And have the advocates ever worried about the millions of cases that keep piling up and are pending for decades before different courts? Are you so naive, that you don’t know that it is only because they can throw their tantrums anytime due to the monopoly that they enjoy to appear before courts? Is this not “causing strict hurdle” for ensuring speedy justice for citizens of India? After all, giving justice is one of the Directive Principles of our Constitution. (I am assuming that the so called advocates making noise here are at least aware of what is the meaning of the Directive Principles of our Constitution) Now, to ease the burden of courts and to ensure speedy justice, why don’t you recommend to amend the Advocates’ Act to allow CAs also to appear before courts?

    I hope you will at least reply to me and not vanish like the author of this article.

    deccanchronicle.com/130307/news-current-affairs/article/over-3-crore-cases-pending-courts-india-government

    Over 3 crore cases pending in courts in India: Government

    New Delhi: Over three crore cases are pending in various courts across the country and this ‘unacceptable level’ can be reduced by appointment of more judges and modernisation, Law Minister Ashwani Kumar said on Thursday…..

  83. Raghav Goyal says:

    Do anyone on this forum know that;
    INDIA CHARTERED ACCOUNTANCY Course;
    has been recognized as;
    one of the world’s toughest courses;
    by GUINNESS WORLD RECORD book and;
    LIMCA’s WORLD RECORD book.

    Instead, Indian Chartered Accountancy Course has also been recognized as;
    a tougher course than;
    INDIA IAS or IPS courses.

    Has any other course been recognized as such?????

    Please answer…else don’t do commentary in this forum…

  84. U.D.VENKATESH says:

    C.S.Dinesh Sab,

    At this stage, if Income-Tax Deptt. does not wake-up & understand the reality of the issue prevailing on date, our country will be put in trouble for the benefit of few vested interest

  85. C.S.Dinesh says:

    Mandeep ji,

    If you go by political reasons, then everything will seem to be based on the politics only for you. One of the member from the Advocate fraternity lost the case at the initial level which was nullified by amendment in parliament even before the case reach the HC level and this fact cannot denied by anyone.

    Just take a statistics of number of members of BCI and that of other Professional bodies. You will find that the CA,CS,CMA are very less. Still you people are not able to get the fruit means the senior members of your council are aware of the quality of work done by the CAs… Dont try to damage these which will destroy the wishes of many students who are entering the profession. Just because you could not appear and pass CA, dont destroy your next generation by trying to abolish a professional body.

  86. C.S.Dinesh says:

    Nagesh ji,

    Just go through this article and tell me, is there any word which claims deletion of 44AB..

    Last para of this article….”This being the case, I do not understand why only Chartered Accountants are authorized to conduct Tax Audit U/s 44AB of Income-Tax Act and enjoy monopoly of authority, causing strict hurdle for voluntary compliance”.

    Nowhere the author mentioned about deletion of 44AB.. only after failing to contest their demand with the leading professionals like Balu&Anand, the Non-CAs claimed for deletion of 44AB.

    Advocates should argue and hit back their opponents by point sir, and not by deviating the main thing and raising the same questions again and again. CAs are far better placed in accepting the results rather than dragging the case for want of favourable decisions….

  87. M.N.NAGESH says:

    C.S.Dinesh Sir,

    I think, Advocates are not claiming power to sign tax audit report, instead seeking deletion of Section 44AB from Income-Tax Act for genuine reason that it is causing strict hurdle for voluntary compliance due to monopoly of authority granted to CA’s & also contrary to Advocates Act. Ie, Advocates alone entitled to practice law, because of the Section 44AB Advocates are required to bow down before CA’s which is against word “Noble Profession”. By latest, Bar Council of India is taking necessary steps in the matter.

  88. Ganesh says:

    Balu&Anand sir,

    Its an implied thing that they are not able to challenge this public debate. The same can be understood by his request to you for providing your e-mail ID.

    Mandeep ji,

    your supporters mentioned about the Chennai HC verdict whereas the SC decision is now quoted by Mr.Balu&Anand. Do you still say that this article is not contempt of court but the Income-tax Act is contempt of court??????

    What sort of logic you people are having with this kind of mindset…..

    Supreme court decision prevails as against the other HC decisions.. Do you still disagree this and appeal to BCI, then go ahead sir. There is no benevolence when you people claim something and after knowing that you wont get, you try to destroy it. Now you say BCI is at benevolence………..

  89. Balu & Anand says:

    B.S.K.RAO says:
    June 7, 2013 at 10:26 AM

    If uploading of tax audit report by only CA’s made, it amounts to practice of law by Chartered Accountants & contrary to Advocates Act, 1961 read with latest SC Verdict. Further, Income-Tax Deptt. is liable for action under Article 129, read with Article 142(2) of Indian Constitution for contempt of court.

    The fact that the Same Supreme Court categorically ruled that CAs stand on a different footing on audit matters is conveniently forgotten. The article in question itself is in contempt of the Hon’ble SC.

    Mr BSK Raoji, are you still considering taking up my challenge for a public debate and answer my questions or do we formally conclude that you don’t have the answers and close this issue?

    Lets move on to other topics.

  90. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    MR. DINESH JI.
    I ALREADY EXPLAINED, THERE IS NOTHING RIGHT IN INCOME TAX ACT 1961.
    OTHER PERSONS DOING “PRACTICE OF LAW” ON MERE WORD APPEARANCE U/S 288 OF INCOME TAX ACT.

    SIR I WANT TO EXPLAIN HERE, CIVIL & SESSION COURTS ALSO ALLOWED TO OTHER PERSONS APPEARANCE TO REACH ON CORRECT JUDGEMENT.
    ANY EMPLOYEE OF ANY DEPARTMENT, IF HE GOT AUTHORITY LETTER FROM DESIGNATED OFFICER OF THE DEPARTMENT. BUT IT DOESN’T MEAN THEY ARE AUTHORIZED FOR PRACTICE OF LAW AS LIKE ADVOCATE.

    MR. DINESH JI AS PER INDIAN LAW, NON ADVOCATES ARE VIOLATING ADVOCATE ACT 1961. EVERY PERSON TREATED ACCORDING TO ACT IN WHICH HE COMMITS ANY OFFENCE. BCI HAS POWER TO REGISTER FIR AGAINST NON ADVOCATES WHO ARE DOING PRACTICE OF LAW. IT IS BENEVOLENCE OF BCI NOT TAKING ANY ACTION. PL NOT CHALLENGE TO BCI.
    SIR AS PER RTI ICAI ADMITTED THAT IT DOESN’T NOT ISSUED ANY CERTIFICATE FOR “PRACTICE OF LAW” TO ITS MEMBERS.

    SIR AS PER TAX PROFESSIONAL- CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT for this political backup may be reason because it is against main object of “advocate profession”.

    SIR YOU WILL FIND YOUR ANSWER TO THE COMMENT JUNE 7,2013 AT 2.33PM
    PL READ MY COMMENT MAY 30, 2013 AT 12.34 A.M

  91. C.S.Dinesh says:

    To
    Bar council of India & Other Advocates Associations in India.

    The Advocates Act has been enacted to regulate the Practice of Law in India. Contrary to this, so many advocates have indulged in the acts which are not provided in the said Act. The proof of the same are provided in the links submitted by Mr.Balu&Anand. The Bar council is hereby requested to provide the actions taken against such persons and also to regulate the members in the best interest of the nation.

    The CA Regulations has list out the work to be carryout by the CAs. If anybody feel that CAs do the activities which are prohibited by the said Act, then they are requested to complain to the ICAI about such CA members.

    And, the first mistake by the CAs to be complained is about their signing of 44AB for which the audit was carried out by the Non-CAs externally.

    The author said, “If uploading of tax audit report by only CA’s made, it amounts to practice of law by Chartered Accountants & contrary to Advocates Act, 1961 read with latest SC Verdict. Further, Income-Tax Deptt. is liable for action under Article 129, read with Article 142(2) of Indian Constitution for contempt of court.”

    If you feel so, then file a complaint to take action and let the Court decide.

    Few Advocates didnt mind about filing such complaint when you claimed the 44AB signing powers in this article. Not even a word about contempt of court and alkl. Now that you understood that you will no longer be able to get such powers, you are saying Article 129, Supreme Court, etc., etc.,

  92. M.N.NAGESH says:

    TO MINISTRY OF FINANCE

    In another 10 to 20 years, almost all Non-CA Tax Professionals who entered tax profession in 1980’s will die. In view of Certificates/Reports by only CA’s in Income-Tax Act, new Non-CA Tax professionals are not entering tax profession. Then, Govt. has to relay on only 59,472 CA’s for seeking compliance U/s 139 of Income-Tax Act.

    Now, it is right time our esteemed Central Govt. should come out with measures for increasing tax professionals to increase genuine tax base of assesses under Income-Tax Act. I hope that Central Govt. will come out with Tax Practitioners Bill either in the lines of Australia on in the lines of Republic of South Africa.

  93. B.S.K.RAO says:

    TO MINISTRY OF FINANCE

    As per the latest available records with me, 59,472 Chartered Accountants, 2,427 Cost Accountants & 5,170 Company Secretaries are practicing throughout India. If Central Board of Direct Taxes granted powers to sign off 44AB Certificate to Cost Accountants & Company Secretaries in 1984, considering the reality of the fact that course curriculum is almost similar in all three institutes, revenue collection might have touched not less than 15 times the present revenue collection.

    Logic behind the above claim is as under:-

    Cost Accountants & Company Secretaries residing in the area other than capital cities do not have sufficient work to setup an independent office. If such powers to issue 44AB report might have been given to them in 1984 itself, many of them might have preferred to take up these courses since from 1984 & their total strength also might have touched in the range of 1,20,000 members. In order to sustain in profession, they too might have propagated Income-Tax law & supported voluntary compliance U/s 139 of Income-Tax Act.

  94. MURALIDHAR.R.G. says:

    MEASURES TO WIDEN TAX BASE

    *Tax audit data provided by CBDT has been published in CA Club website on 16.11.2011. Herein, it is evident that only 59,472 Chartered Accountants are practicing tax law throughout India. Here, Govt. should understand that because of CA Certificates in Income-Tax, new Non-CA Tax Professionals are not entering tax profession.

    *Tax audit by only CA’s introduced in 1984. If such authority might have also been given at least to Cost Accountant & Company Secretaries whose institutes syllabus are almost similar to CA Institute, more number of such related professionals might have entered tax profession to support voluntary compliance & tax collection at this time might have touched not less than the 20 folds the existing collection.

    *Why our esteemed Central Govt. can not understand this simple logic for widening genuine tax base of assesses, but still rely on only CA’s for tax collection ?

  95. M.N.NAGESH says:

    Hon’ble Finance Minister Sri.P.Chidambaram Sir,

    In line No.121 Tax Proposals-Budget Speech 2013, you have stated that “An emerging economy must have a tax system that reflects best global practice. I propose to set up a Tax Administration Reform Commission to review the application of tax policies and tax laws and submit periodic reports that can be implemented to strengthen the capacity of our tax system”

    In line No.154 Tax Proposal-Budget Speech 2013, you have stated that “Direct Taxes Code (DTC) is work in progress. The DTC is not intended to be an amended version of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, but a new code based on the best international practice that will be compatible with the needs of a fast developing economy”.

    Based on the above, can we presume that action to widen genuine tax base will be taken in DTC by encouraging diversified group of tax professionals to enter tax practice in India on introduction of Tax Practitioners Bill prevailing in other countries ?

  96. C.S.Dinesh says:

    U.D.Venkatesh sir,

    Even the decisions of Supreme court have been breached by the so called state to which the author belongs. In the circumstances, how could you expect the Bar Council to take action on ICAI members in the name of practising law contrary to the Advocates Act.

    I wish the senior Advocates and other members of Bar council are aware of the situation and they would gratefully act in not taking the action against the ICAI or its members.

    Those who shout here seem to be the people who studied for something through other courses and ended up diverting themselves to taxation knowing that they are no longer worth in their respective field and now trying to get the CAs out of this regime. 44AB is there since 1984, almost 30 years. If you people with 10 years experience have ever tried the CA exam, they may (or may not) have passed. Instead, they are demanding something which the Act is not providing.

    Whenever a verdict is passed by the Honourable High court or Supreme court, the same get nullified by the amendment of the Act by the Parliament.

    After all, its the Income-tax Act which specifically empowers them for representation in CIT Appeals, Tribunal , etc.,

    If you people still want to prosecute the CAs for such act, then go ahead and try to take action instead of shouting here. The ICAI will face it. Even if your fraternity verdicts something against the CAs, the Parliament is there to amend the Advocates Act or the Chartered Accountants Act.

  97. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    I AGREED TO MR. BSK RAO JI.
    TO CERTIFY AUDIT REPORT SHOULD BE LEAVE ON ASSESSEE.

    MY CA FRIENDS OFTEN ASK QUESTIONS ADVOCATES CHARGE MORE FEES IN HIGH COURTS & SUPREME COURTS THEN FEES CHARGED BY CA TO CERTIFY AUDIT REPORT.

    SIR I DON’T HAVE ANY ANIMOSITY WITH CA’S. BUT I WANT TO EXPOSE TRUTH BEHIND THE AUDIT CERTIFICATES.

    SIR IN COURTS CLIENT HAS OPTION OF “IN-PERSON” APPEARANCE TO PLEAD HIS CASE BEFORE COURTS, IT DOESN’T MATTER HE KNOWS THE PROCEDURE OF COURT OR NOT. IT IS NOT COMPULSORILY FOR CLIENT TO TAKE SERVICES OF ADVOCATES AS LIKE AUDIT REPORTS UNDER INCOME TAX ACT.

    THESE REPORTS ARE INTRODUCED WITH A MOTIVE TO GIVE ONLY IDENTITY & FINANCIAL ADVANTAGE TO ITS MEMBERS.

    WHAT IS REASON A ASSESSEE CAN’T CERTIFY AUDIT REPORTS WHEN A CLIENT HAS PRIVILEGE TO PLEAD HIS CASE BEFORE COURTS.

    POLITICAL BACKUP CANN’T BE DENIED. ARE YOU AGREE WITH ME. THANKS

  98. C.S.Dinesh says:

    Section 30 of Advocates Act states :
    Right of advocates to practise.—Subject to provisions of this Act, every advocate whose name is entered in the State roll shall be entitled as of right to practise throughout the territories to which this Act extends,—
    (i) in all courts including the Supreme Court;
    (ii) before any tribunal or person legally authorised to take
    evidence; and
    (iii) before any other authority or person before whom such
    advocate is by or under any law for the time being in force
    entitled to practise.

    The Income tax law would be covered in the said clause (iii) which is the law for the time being in force. This law now implicitly restricts the meaning of tax professional to CAs only. This being the case, Non-CAs are clearly go out of the scope.

    If the author’s claim of amending the 44AB or abolishment of 44AB if they couldnt amend happens, then the section 29 of Advocates Act should also be amended to include the Non-Advocate professionals like CS/CMAs to practise the law in courts.

    As pointed out by Mandeep singh that by 10 years experience, a person would be well versed in Taxation means the same logic should be applied in letting the decade experienced CS/CA/CMA members to appear and argue in courts.

    If you feel the inequity in distributing the tax audit report work only to CAs, then you must agree about the monopoly right given to advocates in court of law.

    The Advocates, with very very (??) good incidents pointed out by Mr.Balu&Anand, will surely not allow the amendment of Advocates Act.

    So the ICAI and its members may be required to amend their own law by providing rights to CAs for representing their clients in courts.

    All the professional institutes namely, ICAI, ICAI, ICSI, IAI restrict their members with so many regulations, which is not there in Advocates Act leading to street fights and rowdeesam among themselves.

  99. Balan says:

    The Advocates Act need to be amended to enable the CS/CA/CMA who represent their clients in their respective field to appear in the courts too to represent their clients. This will reduce the financial burden of the assessees to a large extent.

    Most of the Advocates argue cases based on the points noted down by the CAs only in Income tax matters. This goes unnoticed when Mandeep singh claims about financial burden of assessees.

    He argued for claiming signing power of 44AB first, then claimed deletion of the said provision, then claimed for deletion of the course itself thus showing his immaturity in accepting the truth in a proper way.

    One thing which need to be mentioned here is that not all advocates are crying like some people here for something which they dont deserve. There are good Advocates who gracefully accept the respect which the professional institutes deserve and they do carry out their professionalism in their respective field when it comes to court of law. Just like Satyam case Auditors, there are advocates who shout for something which they DONT DESERVE.

    The CBDT information received by the ICAI has to be probed into and the offenders need to be punished for making such fraudulent reports.

  100. Balan says:

    Rao sir,

    If you think Ganesh ji is not arguing technically, then the entire blog is meaningless only which claims the right for people who dont deserve. When the Income tax Act specifically empowers the CAs only to sign the 44AB reports, how could you claim sir?

    You people who do strikes and rowdism as mentioned by Balu ji, dont deserve to be called as professionals. If at all the Govt. decides to extend the scope to non-CAs, it should be to CS/CMAs and not to BCI. Then even silly things will make the 44AB time limit to go on prolonged forever like the cases pending in courts.

    The link which is provided by Rao ji is his own blog which was made recently and the information therein shows that his fight for something which he dont deserve was put to end by the ICAI & CBDT which made him put another cry here.

    Rao ji, the case which you mentioned is not as bad as the rowdism of your fraternity which Balu sir has pointed out.

  101. Balu & Anand says:

    K.MUKAMBIKA commented….

    “The shocking findings by ICAI and submission of such findings with CBDT, It shocked CBDT too. CBDT didn’t waste their time and started their own comfort regime of digitalization of submission of Tax Audit reports. Now Tax audit report digitally signed by the tax auditor shall be allowed to be uploaded along with the return of income, But the billion dollar question is what we have done to investigate and to take action against those who are offenders in such cases. It is quite possible that cases where No COP is there or part time COP is there, their names and membership numbers have been misused by the offenders.”

    SHOCKING INDEED!

    This should be investigated thoroughly to see if the Non CAs like advocates etc some of whom also pose as tax consultants and practitioners are fraudulently uploading returns by putting some CA’s membership number, which are in public domain and can be easily obtained from different websites. That way, they must be also cheating their clients by claiming they have paid some CA for the report.

  102. B.S.K.RAO says:

    If uploading of tax audit report by only CA’s made, it amounts to practice of law by Chartered Accountants & contrary to Advocates Act, 1961 read with latest SC Verdict. Further, Income-Tax Deptt. is liable for action under Article 129, read with Article 142(2) of Indian Constitution for contempt of court.

  103. Ganesh says:

    Rao ji,

    I agree that I purposely did in not mentioning about the threat made by the UFM by delegating the powers to other sister institutes. But dont forget that this is how you advocates are arguing in courts. Not only your strength matters but also the weakness others too becomes strength for you. This is how the Vodafone case was lost by the Govt. This fact of not arguing properly by the Department representative was also revealed in many forums and meetings.

  104. B.S.K.RAO says:

    TO INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA

    If ICAI realy at least 1% concerned about India & Indian Govt. revenue, let it members do the job of accounting profession only, for which it was constituted & do not enter into others area of operation ie, “PRACTICE OF LAW”

  105. Ganesh says:

    Rao Ji,

    If the same thing like that by our Finance Minster is done when the advocates boycott courts, namely, vesting the practising powers to CS, CAs or CMAs, then you people wont be going to courts silently but rather damage peace of other general public (unlike CAs who worked day and night.

    The word Professional can be so termed for members of ICAI, ICAI, ICSI and IAI who do not indulge in rowdism like those pointed out by Balu & Anand sir.

    Whatever you put-forth here or to Ministry of Finance, let us see what the ministry is doing. The parliament people also know that if you are given such powers, then 44AB will not be completed on or before 30th september of the assessment year, but will go on being dragged for years… which is an undisputed truth and it will be evidenced within 2 years if you get such signing powers.

  106. B.S.K.RAO says:

    K.MUKAMBIKA MADAM,

    Importance given to Tax Audit by fixing heavy penal cause is the main cause for these events. Hence, I suggest Govt. either delete Section 44AB or delete Section 271B of Income-Tax Act, leave the option of tax audit to assesses, rather taking the option of uploading the same. This is in the interest of revenue. This claim is also made on the ground that since 1984 there is no single instance of utilisation of such tax audit report by the Deptt. to conclude quality assessment.

  107. B.S.K.RAO says:

    ICAI FALLING INTO DISREPUTE

    Against the application filed U/s 6 of RTI Act for seeking information about number of persons holding certificate of practice as at 31.12.2012, Institute of Company Secretaries of India & Institute of Cost Accountants of India have correctly provided such information. Whereas, Institute of Chartered Accountants of India not provided such information. Now the question is, will it not amounts to falling into disrepute ?

    See link: mbaclubindia.com to down load documentary evidence as proof
    for the above statement.

  108. K.MUKAMBIKA says:

    Dear all Freinds in this blog,

    ICAI has received inputs from CBDT regarding TAX AUDIT and the following is the summary of the report so received.

    In the year 2011-12, An issue of Conduct of Excessive Tax audits was surfaced at the various levels of the Institute in its committees and council. There was a proper response to the representation made to CBDT by one of committee of ICAI .It simply sought tax audit data based on returns e-filed during the year 2010-11. The Institute duly received the data relating to number of tax audits conducted by the members along with the membership numbers of the tax auditors and that while processing the data provided by the Income-tax Department, it was observed that a number of tax audits reports were filed by the assessee by quoting fake membership details of the Chartered Accountants. Such as

    a) 696 membership numbers (1385 tax audits conducted) quoted by the assessees in e-returns do not subsist at all.
    b) 420 membership numbers belong to deceased members. Among the same 369 members passed away before 31.3.2011. The number of audits conducted by them is 3621. Further, 51 members passed away after the said date. 2287 tax audits have been uploaded in respect of such 51 deceased members. In respect of 51 members, there is a possibility that they might have died after signing the audit report.

    Further it was pointed out that

    1. Approx. 9,500 Members conducted tax audits in excess of specified limit of 45
    2.Approx. 2,700 Members with NO COP as on 21.01.2012 conducted Tax Audits.
    3. Approx. 736 Members holding Part time COP conducted Tax Audits.

    The shocking findings by ICAI and submission of such findings with CBDT, It shocked CBDT too. CBDT didn’t waste their time and started their own comfort regime of digitalization of submission of Tax Audit reports. Now Tax audit report digitally signed by the tax auditor shall be allowed to be uploaded along with the return of income, But the billion dollar question is what we have done to investigate and to take action against those who are offenders in such cases. It is quite possible that cases where No COP is there or part time COP is there, their names and membership numbers have been misused by the offenders.

    Those who are honest to their professional commitments are the victims because of these offenders act. The victim are having their legitimate right to receive compensation from the offenders .The offenders or third parties responsible for their behavior should, where appropriate, make fair restitution to victims. Such restitution does include the restoration of rights of Tax Audits. Such powers are vest with the council only and unfortunately, there was no discussion at all in the council over the subject. If the intention of Council Members is to ignore the same because of vote bank, I feel history will not forgive them for their conduct.

  109. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Ganesh Says,

    Few years back, when CAs requested for extension of time for 44AB cases, our Honourable Union Finance Minister refused the request which resulted in offices of CAs running day and night for completion of their work on time.

    In continuation…..FM also said if you don’t, I will entrust such work to others, this you have to remember. That is why worked day & night.

    Please argue technically on highlighting the legal point, like that of Mandeep Singh, K.Mukambika & U.D.Venkatesh without mentioning such events.

  110. Balu & Anand says:

    Ganeshji,

    You are right. But we are wasting our time arguing with these people. They are only following the age old trick of shoot and scoot. Throw some wild allegations and claims in the air and then vanish. If you challenge them for a public debate, there will be no response but after a few days they will reappear with another batch of wild claims and again vanish.

    You know who is ethical now !

  111. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Audit means verification, depending on the purpose they are classified as Energy Audit, Environment Audit, Product Audit, Process Audit, Pollution Audit, Legal Audit in USA & Tax Audit in Indian Income-Tax Act. Here, person conducting audit should be specialized in that subject. Hence the word “Audit” is not the domain of Chartered Accountants. In conclusion, person specialized in Income-Tax law should issue Certificates/Report under Income-Tax Act. Further, in CBDT circular bearing No.387 Dt.6.7.1984 issued for tax audit, it is clearly mentioned that it is an audit for tax purpose

  112. K.MUKAMBIKA says:

    Judges of High Court can deliver judgment on any matter including taxation irrespective of their basic degree in Science, Arts or Commerce. This being the case, distinguishing Advocates on the basis of B.Sc, LL.B, B.A, LL.B & B.Com, LL.B does not have any merit on the ground that High Court judges are elevated from within Advocates practicing at High Court. Assessing officers in Income-Tax Deptt. who audit the books of accounts of business enterprise in the process of scrutiny assessment are not Chartered Accountants & issue of 46 Plus CA Certificates in Income-Tax Act require interpretation of Income-Tax law more than the understanding of basic accounts. Then, why apprehension about Advocates capability to understand basic accounts for issue of Certificates in Income-Tax Act. Hence, it is clear that Certificates/Reports from only CA’s introduced in Income-Tax Act with the main intent to bar Non-CA Tax Professionals from Income-Tax practice.

  113. U.D.VENKATESH says:

    MADRAS HIGH COURT VERDICT WITH SPECIFIC MENTION
    AS TO PRACTICE OF CA’S CONTRARY TO ADVOCATES ACT
    BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA SHOULD TAKE ACTION IN THE
    MATTER

    A.K. Balaji Vs. Government of India

    (2012) 35 KLR 290 (Mad.)
    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
    DATED : 21.02.2012
    C O R A M

    THE HON BLE Mr. M.Y. EQBAL, CHIEF JUSTICE
    and
    THE HON BLE Mr. JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM
    W.P. No.5614 of 2010
    and
    M.P. Nos.1, 3 to 5 of 2010
    Head Note:-
    Advocates Act, 1961 – There is no bar for foreign lawyers or law firms to visit India for temporary periods on a “fly in and fly out” basis to advise their clients on foreign law and diverse international legal issues. They are however not permitted to practice Indian law, either in relation to litigation or advisory matters, unless they qualify and enroll as advocates and fulfill the requirements of the Act and Rules. The activities performed by BPOs and LPOs do not constitute practice of law and hence do not conflict with the Act. The Bar Council of India may take necessary steps in relation to the practice of law by chartered accountants and management firms, which is contrary to the Act.

  114. U.D.VENKATESH says:

    TO CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES

    CBDT should admit that legislature has provided special class of persons called Advocates/Legal Practitioners to practice law in India, by virtue of the same they are the only class of persons entitled to practice law U/s 29 of Advocates Act., 1961 before any court or authority or person & now ambiguity so as to litigious & non-litigious matter well decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

    Furnishing information in Form No.3CD U/s 44AB by CA’s on interpreting Income-Tax law more, fall within the definition of “practice the profession of law in non-litigious matters” liable for action U/s 45 of Advocates Act, 1961 as per the verdict in the case of Bar Council of India Vs A.K.Balaji Dt.04.07.2012 (SC) read with Advocates Act, 1961.

    Bar Council of India should take necessary steps in the above matter.

  115. B.S.K.RAO says:

    TO CBDT/MINISTRY OF FINANCE

    As per Section 288(2) of Income-Tax Act, 1961 read with Rule 12A of Income-Tax Rules, 1962 authorised representatives specified in Clause (iv), (v), (vi) &(vii) of Sub Section (2) of Section 288 are treated as persons other than “Legal Practitioners” who are deemed to be in practice of Income-Tax law.

    Now, CBDT should admits that it amounts to allowing persons other than Advocates/Legal Practitioners to practice Income-Tax law in contravention of Supreme Court verdict & liable for action under Article 129, read with Article 142(2) of Indian Constitution for contempt of court.

  116. Balan says:

    Balu & Anand have brought out some links which clearly shows the other side of Advocates. These things cannot be seen among the members of CA/CS/CMA institutes. The members of these institutes can proudly say that they are the members of their respective institutes as against those junior advocates who may hesitate to tell the name of their seniors who are involved in the allegations mentioned in those inks.

  117. Balan says:

    First the author claimed signing power of 44AB which was shifted to abolishment the section. Now the gear has shifted to abolishment of courses.

    Instead of supporting these things, Non-CAs please appeal for the real issue which needs to be addressed i.e, amendment of section 44AD. If an assessee with turnover below 1 crore claims net profit of less than 8%, such cases also require to be audited and tax audit ceiling of 45 cases per CA excludes these cases. So a CA can audit and attest lakhs of cases covered in it. The Govt. should increase the turnover limit for tax audit and also introduce another section to authorise the Non-CAs to certify 44AD cases. This will satisfy the thirst of many Non-CAs. If we keep on trying to pluck the fruit of CAs which we dont deserve, then the end result would be amendment of 288 which will retain only the accountant within the meaning of the explanation therein.

  118. Ganesh says:

    The number of practising members of ICAI at the end of March 2012 was about 82,000 as against the figure claimed in this article. Out of this, about 56,000 members are FCAs and about 26,000 are ACAs.

    No CA will do the mistake of signing more than the prescribed ceiling limit. The CBDT has to probe in to find out the culprits and penalise them. Still these advocates will keep on counter questioning and thus diverting the case which would end-up in case being dismissed or being prolonged till the next generation of the culprit.

  119. Ganesh says:

    Mukambika Madam,

    Your suggestion of amending the section 288 will lead to unemployment for the Non-CAs. Comparing to 44AB cases, there are so many clients who are not covered under 44AB. Such people cannot afford to go for CAs or Advocates. They can only rely on their relatives, friends or employees depending on the issues involved in their cases.

    44AB was introduced 3 decades back and the Govt. has increased the limit to Rs.1 crore that too recently only. This limit needs to be reviewed.

    But the author claims the review of the courses itself, which shows that after knowing about the non-availabilty of cake to them, they decided to destroy the whole cake… that too at the loss of the producer.. i.e., Govt.

  120. U.D.VENKATESH says:

    The issue of legal practice by foreign law firms, lawyers, legal process outsourcing (LPO) providers and others like chartered accountants is a bone of contention between Indian legal fraternity and these persons.

    It seems the matter is on the verge of being decided by the highest court of India. In a recent interim order by the Supreme Court of India, the court held that till the matter is finally decided by it, the Reserve Bank of India shall not grant any permission to the foreign law firms to open liaison offices in India under Section 29 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 ( now FEMA 1999).

    The Supreme Court of India also clarified that the expression “to practice the profession of law” under Section 29 of the Advocates Act, 1961 covers the persons practicing litigious matters as well as non-litigious matters other than contemplated in para 63(ii) of the impugned order and, therefore, to practice in non-litigious matters in India the foreign law firms, by whatever name called or described, shall be bound to follow the provisions contained in the Advocates Act, 1961.

    This means that foreign law firms and LPOs cannot practice either litigation or non litigation related issues in India anymore. This also means that Indian LPO service providers like Perry4Law would witness an enhanced role in the LPO segment of India.

    Of course, the foreign law firms or foreign lawyers can visit India for a temporary period on a “fly in and fly out” basis, for the purpose of giving legal advice to their clients in India regarding foreign law or their own system of law and on diverse international legal issues. However, foreign LPO or an LPO having non legal personals have to close their shops in India immediately.

    This also means that chartered accountants (CA), companies secretaries (CS), etc who are in full time practice cannot engage in either litigation or non litigation related activities in India. If they engage in such activities that would clearly be illegal.

    All companies, individuals, etc, whether Indian or foreign, who engage the services of such persons would be doing the same at their own risks as such services would not be recognised by Indian law. This should be avoided till the matter is conclusively resolved by the apex court of India.

  121. B.S.K.RAO says:

    MINISTRY OF FINANCE & CORPORATE AFFAIRS

    It is suggested to curtail the powers of conducting academic courses of respective institute on vesting the same to universities. Let them frame policies concerned to them to be adhered by all in the course of performing the professional activity. If this happens, our country will be saved from clutches of vested interest

  122. Ganesh says:

    Prakash sir,

    Just because technology has developed, everyone cannot claim that anybody can do the audit. If you go by technology, then why the law administrators are not emphasizing on bringing in Polygraph Lie detector for all the cases pending before courts for lack of evidence. If you put this technology in all the courts, then there wont be any long-pending cases in courts by the year 2020. Then there wont be any headache for people who spend their valuable time in going to courts and paying to their advocates which is a real financial burden apart from mental torture.

    Mandeep ji, This relief from courts which financially hurts the clients regularly is the need of the hour than the financial burden which you meant in the form of Tax audit.

    If you really want to do a favour to the assessees, then fight for amending the clause (i) of sub-section (2) of section 44AA which is as follows:

    “if his income from business or profession exceeds one lakh twenty thousand rupees or his total sales, turnover or gross receipts, as the case may be, in business or profession exceed or exceeds ten lakh rupees in any one of the three years immediately preceding the previous year”

    The said clause requires the assessees to maintain books of accounts even if their income is below the present taxable limit of Rs.2,00,000/- and the section 44AD does not cover the professionals for whom you are claiming a cake which Balu & Anand ji referred.

  123. Ganesh says:

    Balu & Anand ji,

    You have pointed out an important thing which differentiates Advocates from ICAI members.

    Few years back, when CAs requested for extension of time for 44AB cases, our Honourable Union Finance Minister refused the request which resulted in offices of CAs running day and night for completion of their work on time.

    Is there any single instant of provision made by the BCI for running courts on sundays and festival holidays to reduce the pending cases?….?? Many of the courts are closed due to boycotting by the Advocates frequently and Advocates do charge fees from their clients for their visits which end-up in adjournment only.

    ICAI has restricted the ceiling limit for tax audit by its members for equitable distribution of work among them which other professionals cannot carryout. In that case, how can an advocate carryout about 70 tax audit cases and search for more than one CA to get it signed..??

    Its high time, not for 44AB amendment, but for the ICAI to make more regulations on members by instructing them, not to sign the tax audit cases carried out by Non-CAs without their control over it.

    Talking about big-suit case by some people here, so many cases of advocates making false claim for their clients’ insurance claim and make forgeries in records. Just put some key words in net and you will get so many instances for such false claims. Even damages which are not claimable are forged and made as legal claim by advocates. Such cases are also available.

    So many people have approached me and my friends for offering their accounts and audit services and none of them were CAs. Still Non-CAs claim that they are equal to CAs means, Being a student of ICAI for couple of decades, I must be given the signing power first.

    And Mandeep singh ji along with other claimants need to be elected for Ministry of Finance so that whoever argues in favour of CAs in this blog will automatically be termed as Chartered Accountants and certification power be under section 44AB be given to them and hurrah!! I will be signing the 44AB cases!!!!!!.

  124. Balu & Anand says:

    For those who can understand Sanskrit

    काक: कृष्ण: पिक: कृष्ण:
    को भेद काक पिकयो:
    वसन्त काले सम्प्राप्ते
    काक: काक: पिक: पिक:

  125. K.MUKAMBIKA says:

    REQUEST BEFORE CBDT/MINISTRY OF FINANCE

    As long as other than CA’s are also authorised to practice Income-Tax law U/s 288 read with Rule 12A & Certificates/Reports from only CA’s retained in the Income-Tax Act or DTC, controversy continues.

    Therefore, it is prayed before CBDT/Ministry of Finance to delete Section 288 of Income-Tax Act, rely on 59,472 CA’s for seeking compliance U/s 139 of Income-Tax Act. Please do not expect that both wife & Mother-In-Law on their side for revenue collection.

    One more option is to come out with Tax Practitioners Bill which is in the interest of Govt. revenue to derive optimum tax collection.

  126. Balu & Anand says:

    Karnataka High Court issues notice in PIL against boycotts by lawyers Court room witness to standoff between the Bar and the Bench

    While issuing notice to district and taluk-level Bar Associations in a public interest litigation seeking the initiation of legal action against advocates who boycott courts, the Karnataka High Court was witness to a confrontation between the Bench and KN Subba Reddy, president of the Advocate’s Association, Bangalore (AAB). Read further ………..

    barandbench.com/content/karnataka-high-court-issues-notice-pil-against-boycotts-lawyers-court-room-witness-standoff#.Ua7qeJx4jg0

    Karnataka High Court Chief Justice Vikramajit Sen on Friday said, “It cannot be appreciated that the Bar Association should boycott any court if the decision or verdict is not to their liking.”

    thehindu.com/news/national/karnataka/lawyers-should-not-boycott-court-if-verdict-is-not-to-their-liking/article4200558.ece

    Bangalore violence: four lawyers held

    thehindu.com/news/cities/bangalore/bangalore-violence-four-lawyers-held/article2958280.ece

  127. Balan says:

    In India, Institute of Company Secretaries of India, Institute of Cost Accountants of India, Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and Bar Council of India are the four professional bodies passed by an Act of Parliament, whose members are engaged in the line of tax practice. They should shed off their own narrow mindedness and come out of their cocoons and think of the country’s interest. Each one trying to desperately fend off others from what they think is their own sacred area.

    This is what the author says….

    But he forgot that there is one more professional body passed by an Act of parliament – IAI. Can anybody say that these IAI members are not known to most of the people so only advocates can do the work which the IAI members can do??

    Another thing is that only the ICAI, ICAI (CMA), ICSI and IAI have similar kind of provisions with more restrictions as compared to practitioners. Tax practitioners are doing marketing for their business which is prohibited for members of these institutes. So you cant say that 10 years experienced person in tax field is more competent than a newly qualified person of these institutes.

    Ganesh sir,

    In the end, these people will ask the CAs to surrender their COP irrevocably to prove that the answer is coming from a common man and still they will claim that 44AB shall be signed by them.

    Their thinking is that it should be them who need power or the ruling itself should be abolished. What a narrow mindedness, but they say political reasons, ICAI influence, etc., etc.,

  128. Balu & Anand says:

    This discussion and the successive claims made by the non CAs are becoming more and more comical by the day. First somebody writes that non CAs should also be given attestation powers and everyone eagerly jumps into the bandwagon. When they are not able to justify their points, they claim that CAs are encroaching on others’ territory by practising law. People who claim to be opposing monopolistic rules don’t seem to mind it at all when they have the monopoly and when it suits them! Any answers, M/s Mandeepji and BSK Raoji?

    Then, a claim is made that if non CAs are allowed to attest, revenue will zoom up and compliance of law will increase. When statistics are demanded, pat comes the response, audit itself is a waste of time and money and it should be done away with.

    When nothing succeeds, they indulge in mud-slinging. Now the CA Institute is accused of worrying about only the interests of CAs. I thought, the Parliament created the Institute precisely with that objective! Maybe, the people here think that the ICAI was formed to promote kabaddi or gilli danda?

    Coming to Mandeep’s questions… ( Sir, I say this after I have kept my hand on my heart and sworn in the name of Eashwar, Nanak, Ram, Rahim, Allah and Jesus and all other Non CA gods)

    We CAs are clear that we are very concerned about our self interest and we practise our profession purely for profit and for our own betterment. Unlike you, we don’t pretend that we are doing any social service when we sign an audit report. I may occasionally charge a minimal or no fee to a school or temple or my good friend but I don’t do it for everyone. There is absolutely nothing wrong in earning a legitimate livelihood by whatever means we have and making a profit out of it. I have nothing to be ashamed of or defensive about giving a hefty bill to a client for good services rendered. Because, I give him a service which an advocate or a CWA cannot give.

    We CAs are also clear that the CA area is a restricted area. Everybody is NOT welcome. Right of admission to anyone is only at our terms and at our pleasure. We don’t want advocates, CWA’s, CSs, MBAs and all and sundry others to gatecrash into our field. We also don’t like it when they start claiming equality with us and we are perfectly and legally entitled to do so under law. Since we don’t trespass into their territories, we expect the same courtesy from them. Those of you who can understand this will do so, the others can continue to shout. (From outside the gate)

    We CAs carry on with our work quietly and without hindering or causing inconvenience to anyone. Unlike the Bar Council elections, where one sees only hooliganism and rowdyism, our council elections go unnoticed. We don’t hold our clients to ransom by frequently going on strike and we don’t gang up together and boycott courts/tribunals and hinder justice. We don’t pelt stones at policemen and stop others from going about their work. We pay our taxes and repay loans taken promptly which the advocates don’t. Have you ever wondered why most of the Credit Card and Finance companies have advocates in their black list???

    Finally, it is not just the Government and the Indian Public that have recognized the merits of the CAs but even the International community also. This is why, whenever someone wants to travel abroad, the Embassies of countries like USA, UK etc ask for a Certificate from a CA only about the Financial ability of the person. These countries don’t trust anyone else.

    Therefore, Mandeep, you are not fooling anybody here by making tall claims that the society and the Government will benefit by allowing Non CAs to do what they are not competent to do. When you say this, you are saying it purely out of your personal interest and nothing more. You want a share in the cake by any means and if you can’t get it, you seem to be determined at least to spoil the CA’s share.

  129. S PRAKASH says:

    sir,
    the 44AB should not be used as a revenue genration procedure by the CA’s.Because the arguments by CA’s it is very clear that the right to sign the 44AB is for their revenue generation.Kinldy note that once the 44AB audit reprot is enclosed to return of income such returns should not be taken up by scrutiny and no additions should be made u/s 143(3) assessments.If this is not happening what is the use of 44AB audit reports.This is the right time that the section should be scraped for individual and small partnership firms assesseess and should be continued in case of LLP and coporate sector.The qualaification report of the CA should be used by the departments for revenue genaration.Due to technology development and use of the same in accounting and audit even the engineears with accounting knowledge may also be used by the department to crack the techological bottlenecks in accounts as the traditional vouching and traditional audit have no meaning in these years of computerised accounting.Let the CBDT and the Finance Ministy decide this.The more and more knowledge in accounts means more and more tax (planning) problems.Vodaphone is the best example of it.So,kindly stop agruments on this and leave it to the CBDT to think if it can.

  130. B.S.K.RAO says:

    In continuation……

    Tax Auditor is remunerated by assessee & not by ICAI
    or the Income-Tax Deptt. In this situation, how come
    tax auditor report concluded wrong claims to the Deptt.

  131. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Ganesh Sir,

    Ultimate defense against the persons arguing in favour
    of CA’s in this blog is as under:-

    1. There is no such Certificates/Reports in any country,
    revenue side in particular.
    2. Because of confining Certificates/Reports only to CA’s,
    Non-CA’s are not entering tax profession to propagate
    tax laws of our country, on the other hand ICAI think
    that it is Medical Council & not providing requisite output.
    By this Govt. is deprived off from collection of optimum
    revenue.
    3. Non-CA’s are also authorised to practice Income-Tax law. In view
    of tax audit clause, they have to roam around in search of empty
    slots of CA’s signature during due date for filing tax audit
    returns, which is a peculiar situation prevailing only in India.
    4. Since introduction of tax audit in 1984, there is no single
    instance to show that Deptt. has utilised the same to conclude
    quality assessment. If Deptt. show such instance, I will drop
    out from tax profession.

    MINISTRY FINANCE, MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS & CBDT SHOULD
    SERIOUSLY CONSIDER THE ABOVE POINTS WHILE FINALIZING DTC

  132. Ganesh says:

    It is funny to note that people who claim for something which they dont deserve are also elevating other people to justify their claim.

    I am not a CA/CMA/CS/Advocate. I am a businessman who spend more of my time gathering knowledge. Being a B.com graduate and was a student of CA institute, I could understand many things in this taxation field too.

    But Mandeep ji is claiming myself to be a Chartered Accountant means my reply is already there in my previous message quoted below:

    “Still more questions, instead of replying to CAs questions…. means such people will keep on arguing instead of arriving at a conclusion….” and this kind of argument do separate the other professionals which Mandeep ji claims from the CAs who arrive at decisions rather than debating for their own views. May be this is the reason for crores of cases pending in Courts….

    Studying Law and going to other professionals’ field do indicate that such persons are not having clear view of their future prospects. If you want to sign 44AB, pass CA. If you want to conduct cost audit, go for CMA and CS for secretarial compliance. Why studying law and auditing the companies. So you are not clear in your mindset but questioning the finance ministry who take lots of time and experts’ opinion to arrive at every point.

  133. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Mr. Ganesh ji

    you didn’t give answers by leaving behind there personal
    interest.
    You didn’t answer as a common man.
    sir you answered in capacity of chartered accountant.

    sir pl read three things before answer as mentioned in comment.

    2 JUNE 2013 AT 1.59 AM

  134. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    SIR AS PER MY KNOWLEDGE, ADVOCATE BSK RAO HAVE VAST KNOWLEDGE IN TAXATION LAWS & OTHER INDIAN LAWS INCLUDING ACCOUNTANCY.
    MR. BSK RAO’S EVERY WORD HAVE LOGIC.

  135. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Dear Mr.
    Raghav ji.
    section 288(2) of income tax act doesn’t give importance to word” Specialty” in any filed.
    Main object of advocate profession is “practice of law”. they have specialty in filed of law & according to this there was no need of section 288 in income tax act.

    section 288 is a big exception for word “specialty” according to this section our ministry of finance have cleared there is no need of specialty in any filed under income tax law.
    then why CA’S are uproar for audit reports on behalf of specialty. For this section 288(2) of income tax act should be applicable without any bias.

    sir it is clear, entry of these reports under income tax act, due to only political backup without any necessity.

    there shouldn’t be any bias with other professional on behalf of specialty.

    AUDIT REPORTS UNDER INCOME TAX ACT SHOULD BE TREATED AS PRACTICE OF LAW.

  136. Raghav Goyal says:

    Respected Mandeep Singh Ji,

    You mean to say that if a person could find any specialist doctor in his nearby locality then he should go to a chemist(in his nearby locality) and ask him to do the operations/surgery of the body??

  137. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Only motto of ICAI is to provide full employment to its members at any cost. In fact, ICAI wants that all members get bank branch audit work. ICAI being both regulatory authority & examination conducting authority for CA course, it maintains low output of members for market demand. This is the crux of the matter causing strict hurdle for compliance U/s 139 of Income-Tax Act, which no one can understand. Even the Ministry of Finance can not understand this.

  138. K.MUKAMBIKA says:

    THIS QUESTION IS TO FINANCE MINISTRY

    When CA’s commenting in this blog admit that CA Course is very tough & percentage of out is very less. How come the Govt. gets revenue, when it confines powers of certification in taxation laws to only CA’s.

    In this blog, Non-CA’s are not trying to seek power to sign 44AB report. Here the question is withour 44AB report compliance can not be given U/s 139. Even holding it can be given, assessee is at the risk of penal provision.

    In conclusion, importance given to tax audit U/s 44AB of Income-Tax Act, because of heavy penal provision, CBDT is not getting compliance U/s 139 of Income-Tax Act.

  139. Ganesh says:

    Without replying to the questions put-up by the CAs, the Non-CAs expecting the CAs to reply for their questions. It is funny to notice that their questions are answered but still they are repeatedly asking for the answers, thus avoiding replies to CAs’ questions.

    Take a statistics of Financial data of Companies who pay fees to CAs and Advocates (only for taxation representation in HC / SC) and you will find more financial burden is because of not authorising the CAs to represent the assessees in HC / SC. Not only Mr.Raghav Goyal, but all the CAs whose case goes up to HC / SC has this issue of preparing the case details but not being able to argue by them in person in Courts.

    1) As I mentioned earlier, Because of qualified Audit reports only, the Assessing officers could take the case for scrutiny. As pointed out by Pravinkumar.A sir, a CA was killed for not issuing a clean report which was against the interest of the Company (though in the interest of the nation).

    2) The officers are not required to deal with Unqualified reports of CAs. If CAs wrongly unqualify a report which requires to be qualified, then the ICAI is there to take action on them.

    3) Audit fees for 44AB is not a financial burden at all as the fees charged is not a huge one compared to Advocates.

    4)Regarding political reasons, only politicians who introduced shall answer and not general public as the assumptions may fail and could lead to regret feelings.

    5) When the transaction values are more, naturally it is not possible / feasible for the AOs to check everything and hence the requirement of audit.

    6) Penalty for non-filing can be imposed on small assessees too whose turnover itself may within 6 digits, whereas for large amount of transaction values, because of the higher penalty only the assessees come forward to audit their accounts by CAs. And again, it shall not exceed 1/2% of Turnover and not Rs.1,50,000/- flat amount.

    Still more questions, instead of replying to CAs questions…. means such people will keep on arguing instead of arriving at a conclusion….

  140. K.MUKAMBIKA says:

    PROOF FOR STRICT HURDLE FOR COMPLIANCE U/S 139 OF INCOME-TAX ACT

    Hitherto audit of Co-Operative Societies & Banks in Karnataka were undertaken by Govt. Auditors appointed by Dept. of Co-Operation. For the financial year 2012-13, Co-Operative Deptt. of Karnataka allotted audit work of such Co-Operative Societies & Banks to Chartered Accountants, each getting not less than 20 audit assignments with fees ranging from Thousands to Lakhs. I am afraid that Income-Tax Deptt. will not definitely get empty slots of CA Signature for Tax Audit U/s 44AB of Income-Tax Act, that relates to financial year 2012-13 to meet compliance of return filing U/s 139 of Income-Tax Act for Non-Corporate assesses in Karnataka

    See link sahakaradarpana.kar.nic.in for proof

  141. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    DEAR CA FRIENDS YOU DIDN’T GIVE ANSWERS TO MY EARLIER QUESTIONS
    on 2nd JUNE 2013 AT 1.59 AM. Pl give to answer those questions.

  142. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Mr. Balu & Anand Ji.

    Question. 2
    If value of audit reports BIG ZERO then why advocates are
    demanding to sign the audit reports?

    Ans: Sir answer of this question based on two aspects:-

    1) If we take favour of only assessee.

    (i) If we take favour of only assessee then I strongly in favour to
    delete provision u/s 44AB. Reasons for this:-

    (a) It is only financial burden on assessee.
    (b) These reports have lost faith of assessing officers that’s reason
    lot of cases are selected out of cases audited u/s 44AB during
    scrutiny & survey. Due to that assessee suffered from huge
    financial loss.
    ( c) Shortage of chartered accountants compels assessee to visit 60
    to 100 Km in rush days by wasting money & time.
    (d) If department totally relied on such reports then I confidentially
    say that lose 90% it is revenue just in 3 years.

    2) If we take favour of advocates & partly of assessees.

    (i) Then I strongly in favour that Ministry of finance & CBDT not behave
    as a step mother with Non CA Professional as explained in my earlier
    comment.
    (ii) shortage of CA in particular area waste more money of assessee. If
    such power is given to other professional then assessee have option
    & not need to travel 60 to 100Km for audit their accounts.
    (iii) If you are not agree that assessee travel more than 100 km to get
    audit his accounts then you can confirm regarding this from income
    tax department.

  143. Ganesh says:

    Mukambika Madam,

    The Income-tax Act has confined the certifying powers to CAs only and hence I said its CA’s territory. Information about wrong claims have also been reported in Audit reports. Like I mentioned earlier, The reason behind majority of the cases selected for scrutiny by the Income-Tax Dept. on date being tax audit cases is only because of the qualified reports by CAs.

    In almost all the cases, one Advocate argues for one person and another Advocate argues for the other. Is that mean that action shall be taken on the one who loses the case?

    In an income-tax case concluded recently, the representatives of the assessee were fined for contesting the assessee’s claim which was disallowed. Any such actions on the Advocates who loses his case?

  144. K.MUKAMBIKA says:

    Ganesh Sir,

    CA’s territory is to conduct audit of financial accounts only as per their
    statute & not to interpret law. In Form No.3CD tax audit report, information
    about wrong claims have to be reported on interpreting Income-Tax law to enable AO to conclude quality assessment. Then, how come it becomes CA’s Territory & hence the matter requires debate. Further, majority of the cases selected for scrutiny by the Income-Tax Deptt. on date are all such tax audit cases only & there is no action on CA’s U/s 277A in cases of additions sustained in appeal. I press CBDT to take action on such cases.

  145. Raghav Goyal says:

    Agreed with Ganesh and Balu & Anand;

    that if report u/s 44AB is of no use then why advocates are claiming that they should be authorized to sign such report???
    And also, if report u/s 44AB is of no use then why advocates are claiming that authorizing them would increase the revenue base of Govt. of India????

    And if advocates should be authorized u/s 44AB then why CAs should not be authorized to represent assessees in Court of Law?

    We have personally experienced that when any advocate represents any assessee in court for Income Tax matters, it is actually the CAs, behind those advocates, who prepare the case files and explains the facts and circumstances of the case to the advocates.

  146. Ganesh says:

    Dear Mandeep singh ji,

    You have mentioned that so many cases selected are Audit cases. Its because of the qualified reports by CAs, the assessing officers (or the system for that matter) could select the cases for scrutiny.

    CAs are also doing a mistake by signing the reports of accounts audited by Non-CAs. The CA Institute should restrict such acts by the CAs first.

    There are CA students who work and write CA exams for more than a decade without being able to pass the exam. As per your argument, if Advocates with 10 years experience are well versed in taxation, will they be automatically be awarded the degree ACA?

  147. Ganesh says:

    Specific clause of an Act always overrides the general clauses in other Acts. Advocates Act prescribes “Practice of Law” whereas the Income-tax Act restricts such persons from certifying 44AB reports. The intention of the legislature is that such things should be done by CAs only and hence, such clause.

    Likewise, The Cost and Works Accountants (Amendment) Act, 2011 specifically restricts the Management Accounting area to CMAs. When CAs respectfully accept such things and also that of secretarial practice by CS, it is surprising to see other professionals (presuming other practitioners are really qualified professionals of ICSI, ICAI, BCI) trying to come inside CAs territory.

    If Non-CAs think that 44AB should be deleted or amended to extend the signing powers to other professionals, then, the Govt. should also take steps to allow CAs to represent in High Courts and Supreme Courts for Taxation matters which will really reduce the financial burden of the assessees (As against the financial burden of Tax audit fees mentioned by Mandeep singh ji which is very meagre when compared to fees charged by the Advocates.

    For most of the cases, it is the Chartered Accountant who is providing the details and merits of the case to the Advocates.

  148. K.MUKAMBIKA says:

    If CA’s claim superiority over CMA’s, why legislature reposed confidence
    on CMA’s to vest the power of working in the area of Management Accounts
    to CMA’s in The Cost & Works Accountants (Amendment) Act, 2011

  149. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    phrases are separating to each other automatically. pl read carefully.

  150. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Mr. Balu & Anand ji,
    Sir I am agree that chartered accountants are recognized class for practice of Accountancy as per section 32 of Chartered Accountant Act 1949.

    As Like Advocates are only recognized class for practice of law u/s 29 of Advocates act 1961. word ”Practice of Law” covers all Indian Law including income tax act 1961.

    Word “ Accountancy” u/s 32 of Chartered Accountant Act 1949. Only covers accountancy practice instead of “Practice of Law”

    Sir now I come to the point that how can advocates entitled to sign on audit reports.
    There are following replies to your questions.

    Q. 1 how can advocates entitled to sign on audit report ?

    Medical profession – only for doctors.
    CS profession – Company Secretary
    Architect profession – only for architect
    Advocate profession – For “practice of law”
    Chartered Accountant profession – Practice of Accountancy.

    Ans: 1) Sir Section 288(2) is an exception for above mentioned specialist
    professionals.
    If talking of “specialty” then there is no need of section 288(2) of
    Income tax as per
    other laws in India. Because everybody knowing very well who are law
    professionals.

    2) there should be no bias with other representative on world “
    specialty”.

    3) If you opt specialty then section 288(2) of income tax act & other tax Laws must
    be deleted.

    4) Any Advocate more than 10 years in the filed of taxation laws is well
    conversant of accounting system which is required for tax audit u/s
    44AB than a chartered accountant who is new comer instead of three
    years training with CA.

    otherwise leave world “specialty” in any field till section 288(2)
    present in income tax act. It is time, Indian government & CBDT must
    leave step mother treatment with other authorized persons.

    Now please give answer to my questions

    Thanks

  151. Prashant says:

    Please go through the Pass % result of ICAI since last 10 years you will guess the difficulty to qualify CA course. Now do not tell only bright and brilliant students are joining CA course

  152. Balu & Anand says:

    Mandeep Singhji

    Thank you very much for appreciating my knowledge. But like your mentor, Mr BSK Raoji, you are also not answering my questions. On one hand you say audit u/s 44AB is worthless but on the other hand you want the power to sign audit reports!

    Anyway, from all that you have written, I find that your only claim why advocates should sign audit reports is that they are well known in every village and even to children. Well, I regret to inform you that it is actually competence and not familiarity with people that determines who should sign audit reports or for that matter do any professional work. If we go by your logic, Sachin Tendulkar and Lata Mangeshkar should be authorised to sign all audit reports since every child in every village knows more about them than about the local vakil.

  153. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Article by author CA’S certificates are strict hurdle to increase genuine base of tax law & u/s 44AB audit report is one out of such certificates.
    But this article not accepted by CA’S, their own personal interests are main Barricade for this.

    My CA friends pl do following things:

    1) Pl forget for some time that you are a Chartered Accountants.
    2) Pl come forward out of their own personal interests.
    3) Pl take swear of God.

    & now please give answer to my following question:-

    1) Please tell me, Audit Report u/s 44AB have reduced any burden from
    Assessing officers. If you think yes then pl tell me, why so many cases
    under scrutiny selected from audit cases?

    2) Do you think these reports for the beneficial to increase revenue of
    Government?

    3) Do you not think, these reports are extra financial burden on assessee?

    4) Do you not think, there might be political reasons to introduce audit u/s
    44AB.

    5) Please tell me, what is reason assessee financially torched, if he not get
    audit there accounts from CA.

    6) Sir please tell me, why penalty for not filling Return only 5000 & not get
    audit their accounts it amounts to 150000?

    MR. BALU & ANAND JI & ALL MY CA FRIENDS

    PL MUST GIVE REPLIES. IN WAIT YOUR KIND REPLIES.

  154. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    MR. BALU & ANAND JI
    FIRST OF ALL, I WANT APPRECIATE YOU FOR VERY GOOD KNOWLEDGE OF ACCOUNTS & TAX LAWS.
    SECONDLY,I WANT TO EXPLAIN,HOW CAN WE INCREASE TAX BASE, IF AUDIT POWER
    GIVEN TO TAX ADVOCATES. FOR THIS FOLLOWING ARE REASONS:-
    1) ADVOCATE PROFESSION COMMONLY KNOWN TO EVERY PERSON OF INDIA & WHOLE WORLD.
    IT DOES NOT MATTER HE WAS A RICH OR POOR PERSON,HE IS A WELL EDUCATED OR
    ILLITERATE.
    2) EVERY PERSON PREFERRED TO ADVOCATE,WHEN MATTERS DEALS TO ANY LAW OR
    TAXATION LAWS IN INDIA & WHOLE WORLD. ADVOCATES ARE KNOWN AS A ONLY LAW
    PROFESSIONAL CLASS BY INDIAN PEOPLES.
    3) CA PROFESSION TILL TODAY NOT KNOWN BY 80% OF POPULATION OF INDIA.
    INSTEAD OF HARD WORK BY ICAI TO POPULAR THEIR MEMBERS BY INTRODUCING SUCH
    KINDS CERTIFICATES & TAKE SHELTER OF “PRACTICE OF LAW” FOR POPULARITY OF
    THERE MEMBERS ON MERE WORD “APPEARANCE” UNDER VARIOUS TAX LAWS.
    4) IF YOU WANT CONFIRM IT. PLEASE GO TO VILLAGES & ASK PEOPLES,WHO ARE CA’S &
    THERE WILL BE COMMON ANSWER WHO ARE CA’S, WE DON;T KNOW.EVEN THAT WHOLE
    URBAN PEOPLES ARE NOT KNOWN TO CA’S.
    5) ASKED ABOUT VAKIL, EVERYBODY WILL TELL YOU, WHERE ADVOCATES HOUSES ARE
    SITUATED EVEN THAT THIS QUESTION YOU CAN ASK FROM CHILDREN.
    6) AS LIKE MORE WORKERS OF ANY PARTY LEADS IMPORTANT ROLE TO WIN ELECTION, MORE
    PROFESSIONAL MORE REVENUE.
    7) ON THE PART OF ASSESSEE, I STRONGLY IN FAVOR TO DELETE PROVISION U/S 44AB.

  155. Balu & Anand says:

    Right Ho, Praveenji,

    One thing we can all be certain is that a majority of the people making noises here are not serious professionals practising as advocates. I am also sure that there are no or very few Company Secretaries in this too. Normally I have seen that CS’s are silent professionals who are by and large at peace with themselves. They have made a nice market for themselves and most of them have a profitable arrangement with one or more CA’s.

    Mostly my experience tells me that the people who ask for right to attest function would be CWAs and those who practising as ITP’s. These people might have got into the tax field after completing their articleship with one or two groups passed in Inter. A pass in LLB is an added advantage to their image. With a good knowledge of preparing the annual statements and some working knowledge of filing returns they start developing a feeling that they know it all. This gets compounded when they get the 3CB and 3CD forms signed by a CA.

    Admittedly the Cost accountants have not got their due recognition but the CWA Institute itself is partly to be blamed for this. Instead of producing hard core professionals who go through a tough regime, the Institute is content to tell its students that merely passing the exams conducted by it would make them at par with the CAs. And the students too come out believing this to be true only to be disheartened when they get treated at a discount by the average business community.

    I have also been interacting with some of the best and learned advocates in the taxation field. I have also had the fortune of many times sitting next to a legendary figure like Mr. Sarangan, Senior Advocate from Bangalore in the ITAT and generally discussing tax issues with him. He is 80 plus and has been practising even before I was born ! A polite and unassuming man, he has more than once commented on the expertise of CAs in the field of accountancy as well as taxation.

    A gentleman named Prashant here said, it is worthwhile to emulate the self glorification of CAs. My advice for him is that if he can first learn to emulate learned men from his own fraternity, he would soon stop crying like an obstinate child asking for something he is not entitled to have.

  156. Balu & Anand says:

    Mandeep Singhji,

    In one of your earlier mails also we were informed by you that the net benefit to the Government from tax audit was a big zero. Now, if the tax audit u/s 44AB is such a worthless exercise, then why are you people so desperate to sign the audit reports?

    Please continue to enlighten us with Punjabi proverbs and leave the job of audit work to lesser mortals like us !

  157. K.MUKAMBIKA says:

    BDKRAO Sir,

    Even holding Section 288(2) appearance clause required in the statute book of Income-Tax Act, following points should be considered by CBDT to authorise Non-CA Tax Professionals to sign off Certificates & Reports in Income-Tax Act:-

    1. They are also authorised to prepare return of income & represent the assessees U/s 288(2) of Income-Tax Act read with Rule 12A of Income-Tax Rules

    2. Once authorised to prepare return & represent the assessee, it is presumed that such persons posses the knowledge of Income-Tax law read with Section 145 of Income-Tax Act.

    The above two points can not be disputed to grant authority to sign off Certificate/Reports in Income-Tax Act Sir.

    ICSI, ICAI (Cost) & BCI if they are hearing this hue & cry, should take necessary steps in the matter.

  158. BDKRAO says:

    Legislature provided special class of persons to practice law in Advocates Act. Hence, separate clause for appearance by third person U/s 288(2) not required in Income-Tax Act. As a proof of the fact, there is no such appearance clause in any other statute under Indian Constitution. On the behest of ICAI, CA’s took back door entry by introducing CA Certificate U/s 44AB of Income-Tax Act in 1984. Since then, CA Certificates started entering Income-Tax Act & stands at 46 in numbers on date. Due to mandatory CA Certificates in Income-Tax Act, Tax Advocates find it very difficult to practice & propagate Income-Tax law & are forced to bow down before CA’s frequently, which is against the proverb Noble Profession. If Bar Council of India is ALIVE on date, it should consider the issue in question seriously & take necessary steps in the matter.

    When Legal Practitioners are the only class of persons entitled to practice law U/s 29 of Advocates Act, 1961 there is no justification for prohibiting them to issue Certificates/Reports under Income-Tax Act. This also well supported by SC verdict in the case of Bar Council of India Vs A.K.Balaji
    [SLP (Civil) No(s) 17150-17154/2012 Dt.04.07.2012]

  159. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Mr Malikarjun Dev Ch. Adv.
    Thanks.
    Mr BSK RAO JI
    YOU HAVE CORRECTLY EXPLAINED ALL AUDIT REPORT U/S 44AB IN ONE PARA. I APPRECIATE IT.
    I FULLY AGREE ADVOCATES & OTHER PROFESSIONAL FULLY COMPETENT TO SIGN ON AUDIT U/S 44 AB.
    I ALSO APPRECIATED MR. PRAKASH. HE EXPLAINED VERY WELL, IT SHOULD BE LEAVE ON ASSESSEE TO WHOM, HE WANTS TO APPROACH.

    SIR I AM NOT AGAINST ANYONE, BUT OFTEN, I FED UP FROM INDIAN SYSTEM. HERE SUCH THINGS HAPPEN WHICH HARMS TO INDIAN PEOPLE AS WELL AS DEVELOPMENT OF COUNTRY. BUT OUR LEADERS DIDN’T GIVE ANY INTENTION.
    SCANDAL SCANDAL SCANDAL
    ACCOUNTS ARE AUDITED BY A CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT.

    ANYBODY, ANY POLITICIAN, FINANCE MINISTER , PRIME MINISTER, MRS SONIA GANDHI OUR YOUTH RAHUL GANDHI JI & CBDT WILL TELL ME. WHAT IS BENEFIT OF SUCH REPORTS WHICH S HAVE RELATION WITH SCANDALS.
    I THINK NOTHING WILL BE CHANGE IN INDIA.
    MR. BSK RAO JI
    IF WE SPEAK TRUTH, IT MUST PINCH TO OTHERS IN INDIA.

    ” PUNJBI WORDS” DILA KAHNU SAACH SAACH REHNA EH PUKAR DA, TEHNU EH INDIA VICHO NAHI LABNA.

  160. CA.PRAVINKUMAR.A says:

    Balu & Anand sir,

    First 2 paras are the extracts from this article.

    I dint mean all syllabus are same. Letting the Non-CAs go by their assumption that the syllabus are same, My question is in last para only. i.e., Why CWAs finding it tough to pass even CA intermediate.

    Its an undisputed truth that it is the quality of testing and level of knowledge expected that differentiates us from others and only those who have undergone such tests can understand such things.

  161. Balu & Anand says:

    CA Praveenkumarji

    You are answering your question yourself. It is not enough if the syllabus is the same. Even the B.Com syllabus contains all aspects of Accountancy, Costing, Auditing and Business laws. But is the quality of testing and level of knowledge expected the same as that of CA/CWA/CS?

    Forget the syllabus. It is the stuff that matters.

  162. S PRAKASH says:

    sir,
    a person who is suffering from a cold or fever is at liberty to go to any doctor like Homeopathic,Ayurvedic,alopathy,nature cure or to a hakkim.so kindly allow a tax payer to select CA, advocate,ITP or (OFFICER of IT DEPT.,)kindly do not put a restriction on the freedom of the TAX PAYER for your quality/audit/accounts/tax/accounting standards knowledge which can not be understood by a common tax payer expect that of ******************** etc. etc., Why you are entering in to the freedom of the tax payer?The CBDT should think in this line and should accept the truth that the 44AB has never reduced work load of the scrutiny assessments nor has increased the revenue, except the waste of paper/time/money

  163. Balu & Anand says:

    Mr BSK Raoji,

    I fail to understand your logic. First you say the 45 audit limit imposed voluntarily by the ICAI is the reason why advocates and everyone else should be allowed to sign audit reports. This is something similar to saying that because there is an acute shortage of doctors in villages, even chemists and medical shop owners should be authorised to prescribe medicines simply because they also know everything about the medicines not only by their brand names but also by their chemical names.

    The alternative you suggest for this is even worse. Make the entire field of Tax practice exclusive to CAs only. What is exactly is going to be achieved by this? You seem to think signing balance Sheets is the only thing that is involved in tax practice. Why can’t you simply accept that audit is a very small aspect of tax assessments and it is a specialized function for which a CA is better suited man? Whenever I need to file a writ petition connected with tax matters, I have no problem handing over my case to a lawyer. I respect his competence to represent before the HC and accept that he is better suited to do this work not only in the eyes of law but also in reality. If some clients come to me for advice on tax savings investments, I direct them to a friend who is into wealth management. After all he knows more about mutual funds and insurance policies. Should I feel ashamed and inadequate for this?

    Why should an advocate be prevented from representing in assessment and appeal proceedings? Would the fact that he is not given the power to attest make him incompetent to argue a point of law? Similarly, lets assume your logic is applied to general legal practice also and we say everybody is entitled to appear in a court of law for everything. What would be the consequences? Would the fact that I handle tax laws competently, make me competent to handle divorce cases and murder cases too?

  164. S PRAKASH says:

    sir,
    If CA’s are so experts in audit and accounts, why all the accounting frauds like Sathyam,2G,Common Wealth Game,and other corporate scandels have happened?Why Sharada,Sahara and so on….if the fee of the CA is good all the accounting frauds are coveredup in the audit reports.Why the CA are so much dependent on the certification work under income tax act when the whole world of Accounts and Aduit is so wide open for them, let the CA concentrate on more ethical practice of the Accounts and Audit and leaving all other miscellaneous work like 44AB and appearing before the income tax authorities to other non-ca professionals.Let the CA write more and more QUALAIFED audit reports of the corporate sector and thus acting as a coustodian of the PUBLIC INVESTMENTS AND MONEY

  165. CA.PRAVINKUMAR.A says:

    A portion of this article : As per Mr.B.S.K.Rao,

    By The Cost and Works Accountants (Amendment) Act, 2011, name has been changed to “The Institute of Cost Accountants of India” and the members got the power to work in the area of Management Accounts also and can re-designate themselves as ACMA/FCMA. Now, it is funny that both institutes passed by an Act of Parliament called by similar short name of “ICAI”. Of course syllabus is almost similar in all the three institutes called by different name of ICSI, ICWAI and ICAI.

    In view of the above amendment, Cost Accountants now possess wide power of working in the area of Cost Accounts, Financial Accounts and Management Accounts. Whereas,Chartered Accountants are restricted to work in the area of Financial Accounts only. This being the case, I do not understand why only Chartered Accountants are authorized to conduct Tax Audit U/s 44AB of Income-Tax Act and enjoy monopoly of authority, causing strict hurdle for voluntary compliance.

    If this the case, then why qualified Cost Accountants find it tough to pass even intermediate level of CA examination when both the syllabus are same?

  166. Balu & Anand says:

    Dear Mr. BSK Rao,

    I have no objections to giving my email id. But I will not for this occasion.

    You initiated this article wherein you have publicly questioned the relative competence of different professions claimed to be equal or superior to the one of which I belong to. In response to that I have contested your claims and posed certain counter questions.

    As such, ethics and propriety demand that you should answer me in full public view. I am not interested in any private discussions to convince anyone that the CA profession and the advocate’s profession stand on different footings and while they may overlap in some fields, they are by and large mutually exclusive.

  167. Venkatesh S says:

    Dear Mr.Prashant,

    For your information our Finance Minister is Advocate; not CA. Why don’t he do a favor by replacing advocates in place of CAs? He knows what to assign for which profession.

  168. Prashant says:

    Apologizing for drifting away the subject matter of this thread. Some comments now attribute the confidence of Finance Ministry and General Public on CA profession for Accounts and Tax matters etc… those who claim the so called confidence please introspect and think the public perception post Global Trust Bank, Satyam fiasco. At the same we know that if the statutory financial audit is allowed for Non-CAs such incidence would not happen. But to accept the mistake is a mark of humility that prevents the repetition of such incidents. Not to accept the BLUNDER is a sign of an ARROGANT. When it comes to prevent their turf the lobby of ICAI is legendary. Both at central and state level. Some of the Union minister/s and MPs at Rajya Sabha or Lok Sabha are CAs both in ruling and opposition party. In recent past their tarnished and backdoor politics in the name change of erstwhile ICWAI is well known. The fear of encroachment by other Institute/professionals in statutory financial audit is the reason some CAs spit venom and pass derogatory comments on that Institute/profession. Never worry as said the lobby of ICAI with MoF and MCA is so strong that in near future there is hardly any chance unless they themselves create a situation where the so called confidence is shacked in the form of a financial scam. We salute the accomplishment of CAs in other areas and their contribution to the society. At the same time the so called confidence on CAs is all illusion.

  169. B.S.K.RAO says:

    MANDEEP SINGH SAB,

    I too agree accounting systems are made complicated to create more scope for professionals, so that assesses are forced to approach tax professionals.

    Among Cash, Mercantile & Mixed System of Accounting, Mercantile System reflects true profit or loss of business enterprise. In this system all expenses relates to the year, whether paid or payable are debited to Profit & Loss A/c & payable portion shown in liability side of Balance Sheet, similarly all income relates to the year, whether received or receivable are credited to Profit & Loss A/c & receivable portion shown in asset side of Balance Sheet. Further, expenses incurred in advance & income received in advance are shown in asset & liability side of Balance Sheet respectively. If tax professional understand this basic principle, no other accounting standards are required to compile accounts of business enterprise. Now my question is why CBDT is unable to understand this point ?

  170. Mallikarjun Dev Ch. Adv says:

    Sir, I welcome the meaningful reasoning given all the way during these discussions by our learned friends BSK Rao, Manideep singh and Prashanth. it is not the question of superiority of any profession. But only legitimacy and efficiency of individual professionals in perticular area of practice. Ramjethmalony Charges more means it shows his expertise but not greediness. Hon’ble NA Palkiwala, who is all time Legend on Taxation and Constitution is an Advocate. Let our Non advocate Tax professionals, CAs in perticular, not blame that Advocates are not trust worthy to general public. We are not saying that CA friends are not experts, but we only emphasize on the taxation knowledge of Advocates is also sufficient for signing the Tax Audit reports. Frankly speaking, practically the audit reports under 44AB have become redundant and not useful in any way in tax assessments. Pl understand the naked truth in the observations sportively.

  171. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    MR. BALU & ANAND JI,
    ADVOCATE ACT 1961 REGULATES PRACTICE OF LAW BEFORE COURTS & OTHER AUTHORITIES. PRACTICE OF LAW BY ONLY RECOGNIZED CLASS OF LAW PROFESSIONALS. IT IS ALSO A WELL SETTLED RULE EVERY LAW IS BASED ON ANOTHER LAW.
    INCOME TAX LAW ALSO BASED ON OTHER LAWS MENTIONED BELOW:-

    1 CPC 2. CRPC 3 EVIDENCE ACT 4 IPC SECTION 193 OF IPC BASED ON EVIDENCE ACT 5. LAND LAW OF CONCERNED STATE FOR PRACTICE OF LAW ON AGRICULTURE TAX MATTERS ETC.

    MERE “APPEARANCE” WORD IS NOT AMOUNTING TO “PRACTICE OF LAW” AS MENTIONED IN ADVOCATES ACT.SO FOR SECTION 288 OF IT ACT NOT GIVE FULL PLEDGED RIGHT TO NON ADVOCATES FOR PRACTICE OF LAW.

  172. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    MR
    RAGHAV GOYAL
    i ALSO TOO HEARTILY APPRECIATE YOUR KNOWLEDGE ON TAX MATTERS, OTHER MATTERS, WRITING & YOUR INTELLIGENCE !!!

  173. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    SIR COMPLICATED ACCOUNTING SYSTEM IN INDIA IS CREATING STRICT HURDLE TO INCREASE GENUINE BASE OF TAX LAW.
    NOW IT IS TIME GOVT. DECIDE, IT WANTS REVENUE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF COUNTRY OR REPORTS U/S 44AB.
    i ALSO THINK, IT IS TIME TO COME OUT THEIR OWN PERSONAL INTERESTS & DO SOMETHING FOR COUNTRY & INDIAN ASSESSEE.
    MY ALL CA FRIENDS, OFFICERS OF INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, OUR GOVT. LEADERS & EVERYONE KNOWING VERY WELL THERE WAS NO NEED OF REPORTS U/S 44 AB FOR TAX COLLECTION.BETTER TAX WILL BE POSSIBLE IF SUCH REPORTS DELETED FROM INCOME TAX ACT 1961.
    BUT THEN, IT HAPPENS IN INDIA

  174. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Prashant Sir,

    Please make slight correction,

    I HIGHLY APPRECIATE COST ACCOUNTANTS INSTITUTE, THAT BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE INSTITUTE OF COST ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA HAS TO BE AUDITED BY COST ACCOUNTANTS ONLY. THIS IS AS PER THEIR STATUTE.

  175. Raghav Goyal says:

    HATS OFF to Balu and Anand for the points raised!!!

    And heartily appreciate the decent writing of Mandeep Singh!!!

    AND BSK ROA ji, YOU ARE REQUESTED TO GIVE THE ANSWERS TO THE POINTS RAISED BY BALU AND ANAND POINT BY POINT.
    EVERY INDUSTRIALIST AND EVEN A COMMON CITIZEN WOULD LIKE TO READ THE COMMENTARY OF SENIOR ADVOCATE ON SUCH POINTS.

    Thanking you!

  176. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Balu & Anand Sab

    Kindly provide me your e-mail address to meet your needs

  177. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Prashant Sir,

    I am impressed by your comments in this blog. Kindly provide me your e-mail
    address

  178. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Balu & Anand Sab,

    In continuation…. To avoid the situation mentioned earlier, my request
    before the Govt., either retain only CA’s for Income-Tax Practice or delete
    certificates from only CA’s in Income-Tax Act or authorise all tax professionals
    to furnish certificates in Income-Tax Act

  179. CA. M. Lakshmanan says:

    Dear CS SHARADCHANDRA PATIL,
    The articleship for CAs is ‘three years compulsory training with minimal stipend’ which they have undergo before sitting for the exam, whereas for CS and CMA, they do the course as part time while they work and earn and go for training after passing through the exam. So in my opinion there is no level playing field.

  180. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Balu & Anand Sab

    In fact, I am handling around 60 to 70 tax audit cases every year. I can not assign the whole 60 to 70 tax audit cases to a single CA, because of ceiling. Therefore, I have to roam around in search of empty slots every year at the time of due date for filing tax audit returns. This is the practical situation prevailing on date in my case. Now, you don’t feel that this situation is typical one, prevailing only in India to pay taxes due to Govt.

  181. Balu & Anand says:

    Dear Mr BSK Rao

    Compliments for cleverly avoiding to answer my questions. You seem to be a good lawyer. But notwithstanding that in each of your responses to me you are only trapping yourself. It is a ridiculous claim that an audit of the accounts amounts to legal practice. In any case, Sec 44AB of the Income tax is also a part of the law passed by the Parliament like Sec 45 of Advocates Act which you are quoting. Therefore if the parliament in its wisdom and the Government acting on that decides that a particular class of people are more suited for a job, then that law will prevail. I am sure you are aware of the elementary rule that a special provision in any Act can always overrule a general provision of another Act, subject to Constitutional validity.

    As an officer of the Court, you are supposed to respect the law first It is very disheartening to see your brazen contempt for law.

    Your replies prove amply that you have no intention of answering my queries. Let us put these on record:

    1.You have not proved how tax collection can increase by allowing advocates to sign audit reports.

    2. You object when CAs are put in a special category among the people authorised to represent assessees under section 288. But strangely you have no objections when Rule 12A does not recognize a bank manager or my brother as equal to an advocate or a CWA. Call it double standards but I would like to know why this special power is given to a lawyer which my brother is not given.

    3. You are unable to explain why your profession does not enjoy the confidence of the public in tax matters. Why, even the Finance Minister does not have much confidence. This is the reason why an advocate’s fee is included in the list of services under Reverse charge mechanism. Apparently, the reasoning is that a majority of the lawyers are not organised properly and are also not capable of understanding the intricacies of tax law !!

    I shall wait for your replies :-)

  182. Prashant says:

    The self glorification of CAs is worth emulating. They tom tom that general public have not faith on other professionals w.r.t. to TAX and ACCOUNTS hence come to a CA. The question is do public have any alternatives provided by law. Believe it or not to file an ITR for salary or rental income most of the assessees do it on their own. May be due to time constraint or lax attitude some may approach CAs. The question is not the public faith or confidence but the hype created over a period of time that only CAs are tax or finance expert. This hype is ably supported by this section 44AB which compels the public to approach a CA.Now let us have a situation where this section is removed or the definition of Accountants U/S income tax act is broadened. And see whether public has faith only on CAs or other professionals also. It is ironic that even the Books of Accounts of ICSI and ICAI (Erstwhile ICWAI) is audited and certified by CAs despite these 2 Institutes produce excellent Finance and Accounts professionals. Again this is to comply the Law :)

  183. rishikant says:

    no doubt ca had great mind, knowledge and power…….. but some ca do corrupt practice and encourage corruption they should also be brought under the scanner. hence it is true they are surgeon in their field and do surgery to hide……….. taxable income.

  184. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Balu & Anand Sab,

    Audit means verification, depending on the purpose they are classified as Energy Audit, Environment Audit, Product Audit, Process Audit, Pollution Audit, Legal Audit in USA & Tax Audit U/s 44AB of Income-Tax Act. As per Para No.17.2 of CBDT Circular No.387/6.7.1984, audit U/s 44AB is a Tax Audit. Here, person conducting audit should be specialised in that subject. Hence, the word audit is not the domain of only CA’s, only Advocates should be authorised to furnish report of Tax Audit U/s 44AB. If other than Advocates are authorised to furnish such report, it amounts to practice of law in contravention of Advocates Act, 1961 liable for imprisonment which may extend up to 6 Months U/s 45 of Advocates Act (See SC & Madras HC Verdict for details)

  185. Balu & Anand says:

    Dear Mr. BSK Rao,

    Thanks for the courteous reply. At least I have not been called arrogant. However, you have still not clarified as to how Revenue for the Government can be increased if advocates and CWA’s are allowed to sign the audit report. But we shall keep it aside for the moment and concentrate on what you claim about Rule 12A. Let us read the said Rule without bias and see what we get:

    1. Any assessee is free to get his return prepared by a person referred to in clause (iii) or clause (iv) or clause (v) or clause (vi) or clause (vii) of sub-section (2) of section 288, without any compulsions either by the law or the Government.

    2. In the process of (1) above, he may also ask such professional to examine his accounts, documents etc and give him a report. The language of clause (b) of the Rule amply suggests that it is for the tax payer to fix the scope of such examination and determine in what manner he wants a report on the results of such examination.

    3. The language of the said Rule also makes it clear that it is not only assessees with business income who can do this but all classes of tax payers. Thus a person with only salary income or rental income can always approach a CA or an advocate or CWA and request him to examine his passbooks, salary statements, FD receipts and his domestic expenses and give him a report and then prepare his tax return.

    4. Thus far, we can see that there is no special advantage to any professional. Now my questions to you are as follows:

    A. Out of the 2 crore odd tax-payers, how many have business income? And out of these businessmen how many are covered under section 44AB? Do you have any statistics?

    B. Whatever may be the number of such people, let us for a moment ignore those covered under s. 44AB. We will go by your contention that they are coming to a CA much against their wishes although they would dearly love to go to a CWA or advocate for getting their accounts audited. But what about the others who have been given a free hand by Rule 12A? How many of them are approaching an advocate/CWA because they have confidence in these professionals as far as tax matters are concerned?

    C. Now as a CA, I have a limit of 45 tax audits. No doubt, this restriction is imposed by our Institute so that all CA’s get a share in the cake. Has the lawyer fraternity ever thought of such a move to help fellow lawyers? For every Jethmalani who charges Rs. 50 Lakhs for a single appearance, we also see any number of lawyers who just manage to earn Rs 5000 a month by running endless from court to court for getting adjournments for seniors and issuing affidavits for people whom they would have never seen. I am not demeaning your profession but am talking about ground realities.

    D. With 45 audits, I cannot have even one square meal a day round the year! But I am still managing to have a thriving tax practice. How is that possible? The answer is that in addition to the meager 45 tax audits, I also have about 1000 clients who are not covered under tax audits but who have confidence in me. Incidentally, this list of clients includes at least a dozen successful and well to do advocates who come to me for filing their own personal returns.

    Mr. Rao, you have some serious introspection to do. After all, there are more advocates than CA’s in India. A CA is basically an urban professional whereas you have lawyers in every village and according to you, there are tax payers all over the country brazenly evading taxes simply because they don’t want to see a CA’s face. Then what is preventing them from going to the lawyer in their village? Why do they come to the cities in search of a CA? How is it that in spite of the so called equality, the general public does not have confidence in your profession when it comes to tax matters? Therein lies the heartburn. You are unable to convince the ordinary tax payer but are trying to hide this failure by claiming you have been treated unfairly by the law and another professional institution.

  186. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Dear sir
    I didn’t have personal animosity with any profession, I explain such things which happens in society. Every profession have its dignity in india. I am saying about some members who doing such practices.

  187. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    mr blue & anad
    It is not need to surprise as reply to 3 &4 para of your comment

    sir all persons are doing practice of law u/s 288 of income tax act including chartered accountants. fOR WHICH ONLY ADVOCATES ARE PROFESSIONAL AS PER SECTION 29 OF ADVOCATES ACT 1961. PL TELL ME WHAT is wrong if all can issue reports u/s 44 AB

  188. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Mr Blue & Anand,
    There is no doubt Reports u/s 44AB a strict hurdle for voluntarily compliance from assessee. Because due to such reports assessee everything leave on professional & there was no voluntarily compliance from assessee. And professional ask to asessee how much tax, do you want to deposit & assessee given estimated idea for that. Reason for that, assessee not understand such complicated reports. which creates problem for assessee in scrutiny of case.

    Secondly if this power given to Non CA with CA’S more tax professional can effort as a worker. As like more worker of any party able to win election.
    thirdly, I defiantly say that if average fee fixed from CBDT Rs. 10000 per case, which are audit able under section 44AB for inspection of books by department in case suspicious & NOT AUDIT REPORT FROM ANY PROFESSIONAL.
    As per information provided on CA club india 1616096 audit report signed by 59472 CA’S. I want explain following points to increase revenue of country.

    Present revenue to govt. from REPORTS U/S 44AB—–NIL
    If 10000 fee charged by department 10000*1616096= 16 ARB 16 CRORE 9 LACK SIXTY THOUSAND INCOME EVERY YEAR for FY 2010-11.

    If we presume average salary of Income tax employee 30000 PM annually 360000
    divided by 16160960000/360000= 44891 employee get salary without put any burden on GOVT. TREASURY. I THINK TOTAL EMPLOYEE IN INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT IN INDIA. NEAR ABOUT 45000.

  189. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Dear Mr. Raghav Goyal, I am not demanding any authority to certify project reports should be given to advocates. But I am saying for which act we are not authorized not should do that work.
    Secondly, you are saying Bank Authorities compel to CA’S to sign on project reports. Sir I just told you, If bank authorities said to anyone. Pl jump to in a well, pl tell me then any wise person would do that work, defiantly not. so for pl not blame to authorities.
    thirdly I want to explain, on behalf of project reports, bank financed to borrower which is a valuable security. Any document used to get such finance not biased on actual facts is crime under IPC section 467,68 &71
    I want to told my CA friends not do that work, which work can create problem for u & It is not only for CA’S but to other professionals.
    I don’t want to hurt anybody but I want aware my friends to avoid such works

    sir in next comment I will answer BLUE & ANANDS question

  190. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Dear Parveen Kumar CA

    I appreciate your reply but I explain these points again for those members who are doing such kinds of work.
    Thanks for u r reply

  191. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Balu & Anand Sab,

    Even though person related or regularly employed by the assessee & officer of the scheduled bank with whom assessee maintain the account are allowed to represent assessee U/s 288(2) of Income-Tax Act, only Legal Practitioners, Cost Accountants, Company Secretaries & CA’s are allowed to prepare the return and furnish report on examination of assessees books of accounts & documents under Rule 12A of Income-Tax Rules, 1962. Rule 12A inserted vide Notification No.2029 dated 13.6.1962 & authorizes all such tax professionals to furnish certificate or report in the process of assessment, what was the necessity to introduce Section 44AB under Income-Tax Act, 1961 in 1984 ?

  192. Raghav Goyal says:

    Fully agreed with Balu & Anand.

    Not only BSK Rao ji but all other advocates commenting here should give the answers to the points raised by Balu & Anand.

    Only then they should say that authorizing advocates equivalent to CAs would raise Revenues of the Government.

  193. Raghav Goyal says:

    Sh. Mandeep Singh Ji,

    By mentioning the works done by CAs, out of their professional limits, you have shown your personal animosity with the CA degree.

    If you are so opposed to such kind practices by CAs i.e. signing the project reports, valuations, etc, etc, THEN FIRST BLAME THOSE AUTHORITIES WHO THEMSELVES ASKS THE PEOPLE TO GET THE CERTIFICATES ATTESTED FROM CAs AND NOT FROM ANY ADVOCATE or any other like professional.

    THE GUILTY WOULD NOT BE THE CAs BUT ONLY THOSE AUTHORITIES WHO RELIES ONLY AND ONLY ON CAs AND NOT ON ANY ADVOCATE or any other like professional.

    Thus, I would advice you to first catch those authorities and ask them to consider advocates as equally competent to CAs.
    And please please please, do tell us what they replied.

  194. Sandeep Khare says:

    Dear Mr. Rao before looking quantum of Certificate to be signed by CA first look at the vast syllabus, level of exam and knowledge of CA.

    Still if you have any doubt at least appear once in CA exam. Exam result will give you the best answer. Then compare CA with anyone else.

    CA Sandeep Khare

  195. Balu & Anand says:

    Dear Mr BSK Rao,

    Are you seriously claiming that by allowing advocates to sign tax audit reports the tax collection can be increased? This theory of your gives raise to some peculiar assumptions as below for which I would be grateful if you can give your replies:

    1. The number of people having taxable income in India is huge but only 2% pay taxes and the others don’t because they have to get their accounts audited and file 46 different reports.

    2. These 98% people don’t like to pay taxes only because they have to get an audit report from a CA but if the report can be obtained from an advocate or CWA then they will happily queue up before the Income tax department and oblige the government by filling up its coffers.

    3. According to you the fact that an advocate or CWA is entitled to represent a tax payer is enough to make him competent to sign an audit report also. Now anyone with elementary knowledge of Sec 288 knows that even a Bank manager or a Relative of the tax payer can represent the assessee. Assuming your theory to be correct, can we not say that by allowing every bank manager in every village and the brother or sister of every tax payer to sign the audit reports, the entire 112 crore people in India can be brought under tax net?

    4. What exactly is the special knowledge that an advocate have??

  196. Venkatesh S says:

    Dear Sir,

    I do not agree with you sir, CAs never held their clients to comply with law. Also all 46 Certificates are not required by all assesses. Also you are supporting the Comment “CHARTERED ARROGANT”. It is not right. Being a professional, kindly respect all profession.

  197. Prashant says:

    Without getting personal let us face some pertinent and relevant questions. When we say some CAs as Arrogant it only reflects the mindset of hatred they have developed towards other sister professionals like CMA, CS and Advocates. In this forum the comments of Balu & Anand and others to state that CMA and CS are part time course reflects that mindset. Forget the experience of that mindset in work place and in practice. Now some body states Industrialist’s preferred professional is CA when it comes to TAX and FINANCE. If true this is due to the power entrusted on CAs and the hype created as a result. There are many reasons for such choice. In most companies the accounts and finance is headed by CAs. Obliviously their preference will be their alma mater. When the comments pointing the loopholes in the present system is made which harms the interest of CAs such comments become derogatory!! And moderator is blamed for that!! Even freedom of expression needs to be suppressed by some CA sympathizers. Please note this is not at for ALL CA fraternity but those who degrade other professionals (Non-CAs) and does not have an iota of respect for other institutes.

  198. CA.PRAVINKUMAR.A says:

    Mr.U.D.Venkatesh,

    Our professionalism has nothing to do with tax evaders. Like the Non-CAs doing marketing for their work, we are not allowed to do so. All tax payers need not be covered under the 44AB. Your statistics of little over 2% of population under the tax net clearly states that many of us are not at all paying tax / filing returns. Our duty is to guide the clients in the right way to plan and pay taxes. One of our member was murdered by a Company for refusal to sign Audit report which was against the interest of our nation. This is a reported case and there are unreported cases too.

  199. CA.PRAVINKUMAR.A says:

    Mr.Mandeep Singh,

    Like I mentioned earlier, CAs are not supposed to sign projects, valuing buildings, etc., IF YOU REALLY HAVE EVIDENCE THAT A CA HAS DONE SUCH THINGS, then bring it to the notice of ICAI who will take action against such CA.

  200. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Most of choose CA profession, They are doing work of accountancy & do work of other profession which are mentioned below:
    Practice of Law- Advocate profession on mere word appearance u/s 288 of IT act
    1961.
    MBA Profession – By signing projects.
    Architect – To certify value of buildings & other assets.
    Market Surveyor- Certified future sale & Purchase of business & other works etc.
    Such things only happen due to political support.

    Main statutory Reports u/s 44AB which are strict hurdle to increase revenue of country. If all thinks happen, then political backup couldn’t be denied.

  201. B.S.K.RAO says:

    If, 46 Certificates/Reports in Income-Tax Act might not have been confined only to one class of professionals since 1984, Indian Govt. revenue collection might have gone up to not less than 10 folds the prevailing collection, direct taxes in particular.

  202. CS SHARADCHANDRA PATIL says:

    The statement by CA Lakshamanan is fundamentally wrong. THe time commuitment requirement for CA, CS & CMA is very similar. The only difference is the duration of articleship. I think for CA it is three years and for others it is 1.5 to 2 years.

  203. B.S.K.RAO says:

    CA. M. Lakshmanan

    Dear Lakshman Sir, Article is well supported by documentary evidences furnished to the moderator of the blog & what prashant said is the reality of the issue.
    Then, why you feel angry about the article

  204. CA. M. Lakshmanan says:

    Dear Mr. Prashant,
    How is that you can advocate for a level playing field while C.A. is a full time course, whereas the CS & CMA are part time courses. In such a forum how can you call CAs are arrogant? I do not understand how such derogatory comments are allowed by moderators? It is fitness of all things to remove this article as well as comments immediately from this site.

  205. Raghav Goyal says:

    All are concerned about their degrees and courses.
    Nobody is taking about what an industrialist wants from a professional.

    But, if u ask any industrialist, he would always feel delighted to appoint CAs to handle his TAX and FINANCE matters rather than an advocate.

    But when it comes to courts matters ONLY THEN an industrialist has to willingly-unwillingly move to an advocate.

    Anyways,
    we are fully agreed with CA. Jignesh Thumar ji and CA. Pravinkumar ji.

  206. U.D.VENKATESH says:

    CA.PRAVINKUMAR.A Sir,

    What professional quality Sir. Since 1984 till date, there is no single instance to show Certificates/Reports in Income-Tax Act have assisted assessing officers to generate revenue, rather it barricade support for voluntary compliance by Non-CA Tax Professionals. That is why in India only little over 2% of population are under the tax net, whereas in developed countries 70% to 80% of populations are under the tax net. Extra revenue generated in the process of scrutiny (Deptt. Audit)/Survey/Search conducted by assessing officers of Income-Tax Deptt.

  207. Prashant says:

    Dear All,
    Now the topic is moving to CAs and Non-CAs. Some of the comments from CAs are why despite having all 3 qualifications most of them choose to practice as CA. The answer is the availability of lucrative remunerative scope due to statutory backing. The moment Cost Audit and Secretarial Audit become compulsory for all India Inc. like statutory financial audit and earmark exclusively to CMAs and CS, those having multiple qualifications seriously consider practicing as CMA or CS. The point is in India those having statutory backing eats the cake. Let us put forth in this way. Honestly those are having multiple qualification cannot say this for sure. They must have faced the same easiness/difficulty in clearing all the 3 exams. The reason is the syllabus content of 3 institutes are more and less same except some variation of weightage for 2 or 3 subjects and preparation of any 1 exam complement the preparation for rest 2. In 1990s about these 3 exams it was believed and felt by most students that passing CA inter and ICWA final is a Hercules task. Without allowing a level playing field one should not ridicule others…

  208. CA.PRAVINKUMAR.A says:

    Dear CAs,

    Our professional qualities cannot be realised by the Non-CAs. Thats why they are claiming our signing powers, knowing that they will not be able to pass CA at any time. So whatever we comment here will not make them satisfied as they are claiming with empty hands.

  209. CA Jignesh Thumar says:

    Res. Tax practitioner many of practicing C.A. having all three degrees still we are practicing as a C.A. and that is strongly enough reason to your reply. all the management colleges have similar study material why still few like IIMs and other are highly recognized and only their students get good jobs. Its a matter like why M.B.B.S. can not make surgeries like M.S. or M.D.

  210. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    sir as per my opinion if accounting system will be simple instead of complicated reports which create strict hurdle in voluntarily compliance from assessee. decreasing the revenue of government as well creates problem for assessee, because moreover cases are selected from audit cases.
    Faith of department also decreasing day by day from reports u/s 44AB.

    I agree mr BSK RAO Advocate if more Non Ca tax professional in this filed will definitely increase revenue. Because more tax professional will be workers for government to collect better revenue.
    Except all Firt Assessees favour for this purpose section 44AB should be deleted.

  211. CA Rahul Jaju says:

    Resp Dear Non CA Tax Practioners, If U go thru the academic course pattern of CA & thereafter passing of CA, mandatory training thru CPE Hours by ICAI, u will certainly satisfy that why the Govt / Banking / other authorities are relying on the work of any CA than others. ICAI made us ready for market & provide better services in any area.

  212. CA Rahul Jaju says:

    Resp Non CA Practitioners, if u see academic course of CA & thereafter training prog made compulsory thru CPE, u will surely satisfy that efforts taking by ICAI to make all its members to update in all areas are very best & hence perhaps Govt is having much faith to have work done by ANY CA rather than any body.Quality survives. “ICAI moving the Nation Ahead.”

  213. Raghav Goyal says:

    Sh. B.S.K. Rao ji,
    You seems to be more concerned about the society. We appreciate it heartily.

    One thing you should add to your demand that Advocates should also be given powers & authorities SIMILAR TO A JUDGE OF HIGH COURTS & SUPREME COURT.

    By doing this a great relief to the society could be brought. Because, then public would not have to resort to courts and undergo tedeous and long time taking procedures. Public would just have to go to an Advocate’s office and ask for justice even in the cases like MURDER, RAPE, ROBBERY, etc, etc,.
    Advocates should have the power & authority to write even the death sentence in his office.

    This could bring a great relief to the society.
    If you could bring such kind of relief to the people of India then I would stand with for your all other demands.

  214. U.D.VENKATESH says:

    In order to propagate Income-Tax law, it requires more tax professionals like that of party workers for canvasing vote for political parties.

    Just by framing tax laws, revenue can not be collected. Here, author highlighted that only 59,472 practicing CA’s of India can not propagate Income-Tax law through out India to attract voluntary compliance for increasing genuine tax base of assessees

  215. Mallikarjun Dev Ch. Adv says:

    Sri BSK Rao, I appreciate your initiative in taking up a bonafide issue
    in the interest of assessees under Incometax Act to make meaningful discussion and enlighten on unnecessary complainces under Incometax Act. Some learned friends have deviated the topic discussing the credibilities of certain professionals. On any judicial matter, whatever comprehensive submissions made on Accounts, or audit issues, or legal concepts, whether presented by a CA or Cost Actt or CS or an Advocate, it is a judicial officer in tribunal or High Court or Supreme Court, again who is basically a learned law graduate has decide and judge the matter once for all. Every profession will have its own sensibilities. It is right time to make a meaningful discussion by the Tax professionals to streamline the Income Tax proviso at least in direct Tax Code.

  216. U.D.VENKATESH says:

    In the above article, author has correctly highlighted what is causing strict hurdle for voluntary compliance U/s 139 of Income-Tax Act, that has lead to stagnation of tax base in Income-Tax Act since 1984 without disputing credibility/capacity of any professionals & vesting more responsibility on Cost & Management Accountant by the legislature. But, I do not understand, why all are commenting on credibility of professionals with self appreciation.

  217. K.MUKAMBIKA says:

    Some of the comments in this blog does not relates to the issue raised by the author. Because, issue raised by the author is about revenue interest, but comments are showcasing the wrong pride of only CA’s. Hence, I think people commenting have not correctly understood the issue raised by the author.

  218. U.K.VENKATESH says:

    In the above article author has correctly highlighted what is causing strict hurdle for voluntary compliance U/s 139 of Income-Tax Act, that has lead to stagnation of tax base in Income-Tax Act since 1984, without disputing the credibility/capacity of any professionals & vesting more responsibility on Cost & Management Accountants by the legislature. But, I do not understand, why all are commenting on the points other than the issue raised with self appreciation.

  219. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    At last we take favour of assessee. Section 44AB should be omitted by finance department for individual, partnership firms & professionals to save indian assessee.
    Indian assessees also have children. I urge to govt. pl delete section 44AB OF INCOME TAX 1961. So for assessee provide better maintenance to their family members.
    other formalities year or two year based digital signature. It should be for whole life.

  220. Venkatesh S says:

    Absolutely right sir, I agree with you

  221. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Raghav Goyal Sab,

    In developed countries like Australia 70% to 80% of population are under the tax net. Whereas in India only little over 2% of population under tax net. This is because of confining certification power only to CA’s in Income-Tax Act since 1984. Because of this, Indian Income-Tax law could not be propagated well to attract voluntary compliance U/s 139 of Income-Tax Act. I am of the strong view that, it is because of monopolistic trust vested on CA’s for Audit & Certification in India.

  222. CA.PRAVINKUMAR.A says:

    Mr.Mandeep Singh,

    CAs are not supposed to certify the Projections or valuation of buildings, etc., But the Bankers demand that whatever papers the borrowers submitting, require CA’s certification.

    I do refuse to certify such certificates at the expense of losing clients.

    First change this kind of rules by Banks and then complain to ICAI if you come across such things by CAs.

    Section 44AB specifically prescribes ‘Accountant’ within the meaning of Section 288(2) of the Income-tax Act. Either change the Section 44AB or change the meaning of Accountant in section 288(2), if persons incapable of passing CA want to sign 44AB.

  223. Raghav Goyal says:

    Sh. B.S.K.RAO ji, Tax Advocate, we understand that you have read sections 145 of Income Tax Act but you may not have yet understood the spirit behind that section.

    Section 145 prescribes AS-1 “Disclosure of Accounting Policies” and AS-5 “Net Profit or Loss for the period,Prior Period Items and Changes in Accounting Policies” and these standards have been FRAMED AND DESIGNED BY ICAI ONLY.

    And for your kind information we would like to bring into your knowledge that books of accounts are not prepared and maintained solely for the purpose of Income tax Tax authorities. Rather books of accounts are prepared for many other stackholder like shareholders, partners, employees and labour unions, SEBI, FEMA, Investors, lenders, etc, etc, etc…..
    And thus books of accounts are prepared in a standardized format so that every one can use them as per his need either it may be Income Tax Authorities or Investors or Any Other Government Bobies or any one…

    Further, these INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED Accounting Standards, IND ASs, IFRS, GAAPs, explanations to ASs, Guidance Notes on accounting aspects, etc., etc… provide a standardized format for preparing the books of accounts.

    AND NOW,IF your point is taken that a Tax Professional need to have knowledge of only Accounting standards prescribed under Section 145, i.e. AS-1 ans AS-5 of ICAI, then how would that tax professional be able to prepare COMPUTATION OF INCOME from book of accounts which have been prepared by following internationally recognized standards.

    FURTHER, Govt.s of various countries themselves have accepted and recommended the BRAND VALUE of INDAI CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS and have authorized them to conduct the audit in there countries. But, CAs of many OF THOSE COUNTRIES are not yet authorized to conduct audit and assurance practice in India like UK or UAE.

    You, being a TAX practitioner, are talking only about TAX TAX and only TAX…..But govt.s need AUDIT AUDIT and only AUDIT as far as books of accounts are concerned.

    AND AUDITS CAN ONLY BE CONDUCTED BY AN EXPERT IN ALL THE INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED ACCOUNTING STANDARDS, IFRS, IND ASs, GAAPs, STANDARDS ON AUDITING and MANAGEMENT PRACTICE.

    AND WE HAVE FOUND ONLY and ONLY CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS TO BE A READY-MADE PACKAGE OF ALL THESE QUALITIES.
    WE SALUTE THESE CAs WHO ARE INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED and RECOMMENDED TO CONDUCT ANY TYPE OF AUDIT.

  224. Raghav Goyal says:

    Excellent…

  225. Balu & Anand says:

    Dear Mr Srinivas,

    It appears to be you who has misunderstood the provisions of Income Tax Act. The tax audit envisaged under section 44AB is not a certificate that books have been maintained as per law. It is an expression of an opinion that the financial statements give a true and fair view of the transactions that are represented therein. If a lawyer is qualified to give that report only because he practises law, then tomorrow you would claim that he is also qualified to give a death certificate in a murder case before a court of law, simply because he appears before that.

    Can we have some mature comments please?

    Alternately, I have a suggestion for all those here who just don’t seem to be able to develop in their chosen profession. Instead of cribbing about law being unfair to you, why don’t you guys get elected to Parliament and change the law? You need ABSOLUTELY NO QUALIFICATION to become a politician.

  226. ravi kant says:

    why this matter is discussed here , nobody becomes CA. by birth , everyone has to pass the exam and there is no restriction that other professionals are not allowed to do CA. , many of my friends have both the qualification i.e CS and Ca. or CA. and advocate, just pass the exams and have full rights of audits. why we want to have something as granted without any hard work.

  227. B.S.K.RAO says:

    CA. Raviprakash & Pankaj Sir,

    Please clarify whether CA course is a Degree, Masters Degree, Diploma, Doctorate or Job Orientation Course. In order to understand the comparison
    made by Raviprakash, kindly provide classification among the following to
    know who are comparable to Doctors or Nurses to understand your statement
    better:-

    Advocates
    Chartered Accountants
    Company Secretaries
    Cost & Management Accountants
    Income-Tax Practitioners

  228. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Venkatesh S Sir,

    Kindly provide me your E-Mail address, I will give my profile & also to know
    more about tax profession

  229. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Sir it is reason advocates are demanding audit u/s 44AB.
    Second interesting point Chartered Accountants are certifying project reports & balance sheets. Can you tell me projections can be certified.
    1) CA IS VALUER TO GIVE OPINION ON VALUE OF BUILDING OR ASSETS
    2) CA’S MARKET SURVEYOR TO GIVE OPINION ON FUTURE SALE PURCHASE OF ANY
    BUSINESS.
    3) TO GIVE OPINION on LABOUR WILL EASILY AVAILABLE IN AREA.
    4) AND OTHER NUMBER OF PARTICULARS IN PROJECT REPORT
    OR
    THEY FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING EXPERT. IT IS MY ADVICE PL DO THEIR OWN WORK OF ACCOUNTANCY FOR WHICH ICAI ESTABLISHED.

  230. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Dear RAJITH & CA PARVIN KUMAR chartered accountant profession is sophisticated from their main object as per explained in section 32 of chartered accountants act 1949 word “practice of accountancy”.
    “Practice of Law” means given opinion on legal matters & appear before authorities or courts produce legal judgements or argue on legal matters.

    members of ICAI profession based on practice of accountancy as per section 32 of chartered accountant act 1949.
    ADVOCATE PROFESSION based on practice of law as per section 29 of advocates act 1961.
    Pl read judgement of madars high court in A.K BALA JI case & interim order of supreme court & other number of judgements which explain u meaning the word practice of law.

  231. Venkatesh S says:

    Dear MR.B.S.K.RAO,

    I don’t know from how many years your goodself is practicing law. You may be too good at law and a very good advocate. But i am also a smart(budding) CA. I am smart enough to understand Para No.17.2 of Circular No.387, Dt.06.07.1984.

    It reads as under-
    A proper audit for tax purposes would ensure that the books of account and other records are properly maintained, that they faithfully reflect the income of the taxpayer and claims or deduction are correctly made by him. Such audit would also help in checking fraudulent practices. It can also facilitate the administration of tax law laws by a proper presentation of the accounts before the tax authorities and considerably saving the time of AOs in carrying out routine verifications, like checking correctness of totals and verifying whether purchases and sales are properly vouched or not. The time of the AOs thus saved could be utilised for attending to more important investigational aspects of a case.

    Kindly go through the above para and try to understand the words “also”, “like”, if you can understand.

    Anyway you people(advocates) are biased and read out any that part of law which benefits you. Rest of Non-CAs as defined by your goodself as professionals are not even bothered to understand these things. That is the reason the parliament went to CA for audit.

    I bravely claim that given an opportunity for doing audit u/s 44AB to Non-CAs, such Non-CAs would not be able to detect wrong claims made by the assessee and fradulent activities.

    One more thing for your information all the comments are made by so called professionals like lions fighting for flesh. You people are eying on the money involved in Tax audits and certifications and definitely without the knowledge of responsibilities. No client to say business men complained about their CAs.Mind it.

    Do not try to bias the information with your supreme skills to read out a piece of law.

    I regret that advocates have become desperate to earn money. Kindly take up CA course and finish off in no time as you claim to be an expert. You will earn good amount of money.

  232. Pankaj says:

    It is for the single & simple reason that CA degree CAN NOT be obtained by paying suitcase full of money, whereas the same is possible for LLB degree.

  233. SRINIVAS R says:

    Dear All,

    In my opinion, the version of Mr. B.S.K. Rao has been misunderstood. The author has not questioned about the ability of C.A’s anywhere. It is not a debatable point whther C.A’s are Masters or other Professionals. What I understand from the letter of the author is since Income Tax Act is a law (I hope the learneds will defenitly understand), it is unfair to authorize only C.A’s to sign the reports since it is only certifying whether the accounts maintained by the assessee are in confirmity with the law. It is unfair and unacceptable to restrict an advocate who is specially authorized to practice any law from signing the reports for the purpose of Income Tax Act. What will be the position of C.A’s if restrictions are imposed on them from signing the P & L A/c and Balance Sheet?. Instead of calling advocates as unqualifed for the purpose of Income Tax Law, mend your mentality and think with broad mind.

  234. B.S.K.RAO says:

    siddharth jain Sab, here in the above article we deal with Income-Tax Act &
    Accounting Standard prescribed U/s 145 of Income-Tax Act only. Why person
    practicing Income-Tax law required to know so many complicated Accounting
    Standards, which creates confusion in the minds of Tax Payer & Revenue.

  235. Raghav Goyal says:

    This whole debate is showing the mere Indian thinking i.e. “COUNTING THE CHICKENS AND EGGS IN BASKETS OF OTHERS AND COMPARING WITH YOUR ONES.”

    I can’t understand if all are so fascinated by the brand and status of CA profession then why not they all join CA course!

    If CA, CS and CWA curriculum is equally challenging then why people leave CA course before qualifying and join some LL.b or CS courses?????

    Being a businessman I have met and appointed some CAs, CSs and Advocates. And I personally feel that all they have their own field of specialization i.e.
    CAs in TAX and FINANCE sector and
    CSs in Companies Law matters and
    Advocates in court matters.

    In fact many of other businessmen in my circle have the same opinion.

    So I’m unable to understand why Advocate Mr. B.S.K Rao has posted this article!!!

  236. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Venkatesh S Sir, if you kindly see Circular No.387, Dt.06.07.1984 1985 152 ITR, about OBJECTIVES FOR INTRODUCTION OF TAX AUDIT, you will find in Para No.17.2 that to avoid AO’s to carry out routine verification like checking correctness of total Tax Audit U/s 44AB has been introduced.

  237. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Raghav Goyal Sab, We Tax-Advocates concerned with Accounting
    Standard prescribed U/s 145 of Income-Tax Act only, which presumed
    to be known to all Tax Professionals covered U/s 288(2) of Income-Tax Act.
    “Ignorance no excuse”

  238. Ravi says:

    Little knowledge is disastrous. Any way your article is good for entertainment

  239. CA.PRAVINKUMAR.A says:

    Dear All,

    CAs are not allowed to practice medicine,
    CAs are not allowed to appear in Courts,
    CAs are not allowed to certify secretarial complaince,

    Then why many people claiming the rights of CAs without passing the CA exam? Just go and right the CA exam and pass before claiming the rights for Non-CAs. Once you pass out CA, you will realise the toughness went through by the CAs. Dont pass comments without passing the qualifications prescribed by the people’s representatives in Parliament.

  240. Venkatesh S says:

    Oh great!!! Can you please tell me where is word “tax Professional” defined? IT ACT? Indian constitution??

    You also feed big suitcase….. Then you will be called as Tax Professional!!! simple.

  241. Venkatesh S says:

    Dear Mr.U.D.Venkatesh,

    You need to improve your knowledge and the level of thinking. Computer will give Financials!!!!!! what a nonsense argument!? Who said you that CAs check correctness of totals???

    I know anybody can comment anything but add some weight to your comment. Do not take it for time pass.

  242. Ranjith says:

    And as far as certification goes. The cerficate says that accounts are maintained as per law(of his knowledge) and no deviations were found.

    It doesnot mean that he is the last words when he is certifying.

    In the logic of Mr. Mandeep, There is no need of judges in india.. When a Lawyer is the Know All of all Law, and when he is appearing for client, obviously his client is right and lawyer is right.. noone can question his opinion.

    Right?

    If not, then please understand the certification process. and why certification of 44AB(actually it is not a cerficate but a report) is done, it is just for a more expert opinion on accounts maintained.. and Chartered accountant is held responsible for his certificate if its wrong, and CA institute is very harsh on its members negligence.

    Chartered accountant give cerficate for other purposes, and it is very much valid unless found completly unreliable certificate.

    I donot know where advocates gets all their facts from

  243. Ranjith says:

    Mr. Mandeep

    Can Please Explain the meaning of “Practice of Law”????

    Is it about knowing, understanding law and see to it that clients act as per law(the thing Chartered accountants do, Chartered accoutants don’t practice law but know law and practice on accounts audits and taxataion.

    No chartered accountant calls himself Tax Law Practitioner, he may call himself tax law consultant. Being a consultant and practitioner are two different things as far as my knowledge goes

    And as far as The practitioner thing about lawyer goes… Let me not go into the sewage of law practice done by lawyers in india… I thing i made myself clear by not making myself clear

  244. Prashant says:

    We cannot understand why on earth these areas are exclusively reserved for CAs. Why in a Democracy public could not have an option. In some of the comments of Supreme Court ruling in 1999 has been cited highlighting the knowledge supremacy of CAs. Is understanding Accounts, PnL, B/S and Indian AS (Copy Paste of IAS) are rocket science? This is the most hyped profession as a result we have witnessed and would see in each and every financial scam the link of a CA. They are the single most reason of generating black money in the country. This is the truth whether you accept or not. CAs may dispute saying these are one off cases. If their training pattern of 3 years article ship and examination style make them superior let us also state the same (the rigorous exam evaluation pattern, syllabus coverage etc.. of CMA and CS where pass % is 5 for CMA and CS unlike CA where its 18%) for CMA and CS. Without giving an opportunity how come one say only CAs are capable and other professionals are not. In employment both CMA and CS perform much better than CAs where equal opportunity is available to all. Its high time Govt. should open these areas to other professional bodies. And also allow CAs to do Cost Audit and Secretarial audit. Let Public decide whose services they want. Some commented let others take the CA exam and enjoy the field reserved for CAs. So why on earth other Professional bodies created by Govt….? Let there be a single institute i.e. ICAI. Reason of creating ICWAI and ICSI is defeated b’coz of less (no) scope for them in statutory compliance. Over the period of time ICAI managed to get other areas of statutory compliance beside the financial audit. Those who comment the syllabus of 3 institutes are different Let them do a reality check.. There is hardly any difference. So Govt. should seriously think of dismantling the Non-scope professional institutes like ICWAI and ICSI and let CAs do the Cost Audit and Secretarial Audit.

  245. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Discrimination & step motherly treatment shown by CBDT/Ministry of Finance against Non-CA Tax Professionals since 1984 created frustration & anger in their minds to take negative role. The concern of Income-Tax Deptt. should be how more tax can by collected by widening genuine tax base of assessees and not on any professional body whether it may be created by an Act of Parliament or any other local statute. This is how world over tax laws are framed in other country’s. Here, Deptt. should keep in mind that these bodies work in the interest of members only, ignoring revenue interest & hence Deptt. should not rent out its mind. 46 Plus CA Certificates indicates disability of CBDT to administer Income-Tax Act & it has now become extension office of ICAI.

  246. Pradipta ( ICMA) says:

    As expected saw lots of comments from CA forum stressing that the curriculum provides them an aptitude and skills to do such practice.
    However if one goes through the course structure is not very different in CA & CMA ( earlier ICWA). Both degrees demands tough mental and moral aptitude to qualify.
    Some where I feel the spirit of honouring others is lacking.
    Without going into much debate it will be appropriate ICMAs should be given authority to do Income Tax Audit & similarly CA should be given authority to Excise audit instead of keeping isolated domain for both.

  247. Raghav Goyal says:

    1) Could any advocate please tell how many:

    ACCOUNTING STANDARDS, IND ASs and, STANDARDS ON AUDITING;

    have been prescribed by MCA as designed and formulated by ICAI?

    2) And how many:

    IFRS, US GAAP, STANDARDS ON AUDITING;

    have been prescribed by INTERNATIONAL BODIES and followed in developed countries of US and UK?

    3) What is the relevance of AUDIT under SOX ACT(SARBANES OXLEY ACT, 2002)?

    First understand the meaning and relevance of this BASICS of AUDIT PRACTICE and then demand for the authorization to audit under ANY ACT.

    One should not forget the Chanakkya’s words that
    ” Even to the son of the King the Powers and Authorities should not be given without KNOWLEDGE, LITERACY AND TRAINING.”

  248. Raghav Goyal says:

    Agreed with CA. Bhavesh Savla…

    Advocates not concentrating on their roll in society but only counting the income of other developed and organized professional bodies of like CA, CWA, CS….

  249. akhilesh srivastava says:

    CAs now overpowered Advocates in view of better knowledge in accountancy. ITOs himself failed to counter arguments made by CAs. Businessmen also chooses CAs for his case.

  250. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    I agree with K. MUKAMBIKA In recent honorable Supreme court given verdict in case AK BALA JI non advocate could n,t practice of law.
    Sir in income tax act near about 15 person who can appear on behalf of assessee. whether those all authorized to practice of law.IT VESTED ONLY ADVOCATES
    when audit report is perpared by a chartered accountant in such cases additions made by AO who is not chartered accountant & such addition not deleted till honorable high court & supreme court.
    THEN PL TELL BUT IS BENEFIT OF SUCH CERTIFICATES.
    IT IS REQUEST TO GOVERNMENT PL CONCENTRATE TO INCREASE REVENUE OF THE COUNTRY INSTEAD INCREASE CERTIFICATE IN TAX LAWS.
    It is humbly request to government pl save Indian assessee unnecessary expenses & ACCOUNTING SYSTEM SHOULD BE SIMPLE MERE DECLARATION FROM ASSESSEE IS SUFFICIENT INSTEAD OF AUDIT REPORTS.

  251. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    dear AMIT KUMAR I read your comment every return should be certified by CA.
    I want to ask some question?
    1. Can you tell me Income Tax act 1961 is a law or story book?
    2. Who are law professional in India or in other word?
    3. what is difference between word “appearance” in income tax act 288 & word
    “practice of law” in advocates act 1961?
    4) Can a law professional can be debarred to certified forms prescribed under
    any law?
    5) Can a authorized agent on mere word “appearance” not authorized legal practitioner will be professional of any law as like in income tax website created by CBDT what is motive behind it?

  252. K.MUKAMBIKA says:

    Legislature provided special class of persons to practice law in Advocates Act. Hence, separate clause for appearance by third person not required in any Indian statue book [Bar Council of India Vs A.K.Balaji (SLP(Civil) Nos 17150-17154/2012 Dt.4.07.2012]. In this SC verdict, it was clearly held that Advocates alone entitled to practice Income-Tax law. Mr.B.S.K.Rao in the above article furnished evidence that 59,472 CA’s are practicing Income-Tax law throughout India. Now, Bar Council of India should take action U/s 45 of Advocates Act as per the direction given in the case of A.K.Balaji Vs Govt.
    of India, Madras HC Dt.21.02.2012 [35 KLR 290 (Mad.)(2012)].

    On the behest of ICAI, Chartered Accountants took back door entry by introducing CA Certificate U/s 44AB of Income-Tax Act in 1984. Since then, CA Certificates started entering Income-Tax Act & stands at 46 Plus in numbers on date. There is no single instance of utilisation these CA Certificates by the Income-Tax Deptt. on date or action U/s 277A of Income-Tax Act on additions made by AO sustained in appeal. In this regard, I press CBDT to take action on all such cases at the earliest.

  253. U.D.VENKATESH says:

    In fact, Non-CA Tax Professionals are equally authorised with that of CA’s to prepare the return & represent assessees U/s 288(2) of Income-Tax Act read with Rule 12A of Income-Tax Rules. Rule 12A inserted by Notification No.SO 2029 Dt.13.06.1962 & authorises Non-CA Tax Professionals covered U/s 288(2) to furnish report on the examination of assessees books of accounts in the process of assessment proceedings under Income-Tax Act. Then, why again Section 44AB introduced in Income-Tax Act in 1984. When once authorised to prepare return under Rule 12A, it is presumed that such persons possess knowledge of Income-Tax read with accounting standard prescribed in Section 145 of Income-Tax Act. in reality now a days accounts of business enterprises are maintained in computer digital format by part time accountants who are not CA’s & question of checking correctness of total does not arise. Further computer gives out Profit & loss A/c & Balance Sheet for application of Income-Tax Law. In this regard, ICAI has created confusion & misconception about understanding of basic accounts by none other than Chartered Accountants with the main intent to keep Non-CA Tax Professionals away from well diversified tax profession. Hence, I fully agree with above opinion of B.S.K.RAO, Tax Advocate

  254. Venkatesh S says:

    Dear Mr.Shadchandra Patil,

    #1.You are linking Accounts and Tax Practice. It is non-sense.Kindly visit a CA office to understand the difference.
    #2.U think u can understand accounts!!!! and even graduates and Post graduates!!! this is irresponsible and vague statement. As a professional you must acquire some professional skills. The comment made by you is unprofessional.
    #3.Learn to understand accounts at broad level.

  255. CA. RAJEEV says:

    Dear Advocate,

    If you want to do tax audit first pass CA exams. Any one can take up that course. And if you fail that means you are fit to do a tax audit assignment. Can a school teacher/daily labourer/MBBS doctor argue cases in courts for others? Will the bar council give membership to them? What a silly ridiculous article

  256. S PRAKASH says:

    TUMKUR DISTRICT TAX BAR ASSOCIATION (REG.,)
    NO.12/1, 9TH CROSS, S.S.PURM, TUMKUR-572102.
    PHONE: 0816-2275959, 9141736080.
    17/03/2013.
    TO,
    SHRI.P. CHIDAMBARAM,
    Hon’ble Finance Minister,
    Govt. of India, North Block,
    NEW DELHI-110001.
    Hon’ble Sir,
    Sub: Return filing for Asst. Year 2013-14 under section 44AB
    And problem of wrong adjustment made by CPC- Reg
    -0- We are sorry to note that the department has not following the direction so the Hon’Delhi High Court in rectifying the mistakes and wrong adjustments made by the CPC without following any procedures laid down under the Income Tax Act itself. The local jurisdictional income tax officers are not caring for even genuine problems of the assesses whenever the returns are e-filed and many officers are advising us to file the hard copy and not to use the e-filing facility to reduce the problems of the CPC and to get the rectifications done on a faster mode. Just to get the rectification done by the CPC one has to follow un-necessary procedures and correspondence and e-filing of the rectification application etc., which an ordinary assessee cannot follow all these and the department can easily eat the fruits of its wrong things without any natural justice. The Board is not taking any hard steps for easy and early rectifications and in between the assessee and representatives are suffering because of this. The Board knows very well that the returns of income for the assessment year 2013-14 will be filed after 1/04/2013,but every year it will not notify the forms and the e-filing facility will not be opened will June or July and it is practical experience of all who are depending on e-filing facility. Now a days the Banks and other financial institutions will ask for the copy of the IIR V and one has to answer that the department has not started accepting the returns for 2013-14.Is it not a shame on part of the department?
    The amendment to 44AB and raising the limit to One Crore has not effected on the small assessee as due to strict introduction of the VAT by all the State Governments the turnover of even a small of the smallest trader has increased because of input tax mechanism, and the Central Government knows it very well and under the circumstances the limit for 44AB would have been kept at 5 Crore and individual assessee should be kept out of the preview of the 44AB. The Central Government is thinking of introducing GST and if the same happens the turnover of all the traders will increase by two fold. This fact should be kept in mind before fixing the 44AB audit turnover limits. The law of 44AB is like “law without justice”. Lewis Carroll in Alice in Wonderland says : “ ‘I’ll be judge, I’ll be jury said cunning old Fury I’ll try the whole cause, and condemn you to death”
    TUMKUR DISTRICT TAX BAR ASSOCIATION (REG.,)
    The history of the 44AB audit has shown that the same has not resulted in any quality increase in the collection of the revenue nor has deducted any huge block money or irregularities of the assessee nor has reduced the work of the department. Even where the 44AB audit has been done by a CA the Department has disallowed the climes of the assessee while passing order u/s 143(3).Even it has not helped the department to increase the tax base and it remains at the same level as expressed by the Hon’Finance Minister in the Parliament itself. This is because of the complexity in tax laws in the name of simplicity. Here we have to quote Sri Nani A Palkhivala from his preface to the Eight Edition of Income Tax, By, Kanga and Palkhivala:
    “Today the Income Tax Act 1961 is a national disgrace. There is no other instance in Indian jurisprudence of an Act mutilated by more than 3300 amendments in less than thirty years. Simple provisions like Section 11 to 13 (which deals with exemption of the income of charitable trusts) have suffered no less than fifty amendments.
    The tragedy of India is the tragedy of waste-waste of national time, energy and manpower. Tens of millions of man-hours, crammed with intelligence & knowledge of tax-gatherers, taxpayers and tax advisers- are squandered every year in grappling with the torrential spate of mindless amendments. The feverish activity achieves no more good than a fever.
    Our law reports bear witness to the fact that generally a case reaches hearing in the High Court in twenty years and in the Supreme Court in thirty years, after the relevant assessment year. The situation is continuously aggravated by the deluge of new amendments – the indigestible verbiage; and the flood of litigation is heavier today than ever before”
    In the same book mentioning about the object of tax policy:-
    “Two things strike the student of Indian income-tax with trepidation and amazement- the precipitate and chronic tinkering with the law by bureaucrats who are the unacknowledged legislators of India, and the anaesthetized patience of the Indian public .Truly, we Indians area “low arousal” people. We endure injustice and unfairness with feudalistic servility and fatalistic resignation. The poor of India endure inhuman conditions which would lead to a bloody resolution in any other country. The rich endure foolish laws and maddening amendments which benefit none circumvent the law than to fight for its repeal.
    Taxes are the lifeblood of any government, but it cannot b e over emphasized that the blood is taken from the arteries of the taxpayers and therefore, the transfusion has to be accomplished in accordance with the principles of justice and fair play.
    Every government has a right to levy taxes. But no government has the right in the process of extracting tax, to cause misery and harassment to the tax payer and the gnawing feeling that he is made the victim of palpable injustice”.
    If we see the present tax policies and the working of the CPC and the administration of TDS and TCS shows how carelessly the tax policies are framed and administered by the Government.
    Specially in Karnataka this year the availability of CA’s for the 44AB audit is doubtful as the Department of Co-Op Audit has allotted all the audit work of the co-operative societies to the CA’s and most of them have been allotted more than 50 to 65 societies and the limit for the audit as fixed by the ICAI is only 40.Under the circumstances the Board should think now itself to reconsider the limit of 44AB audit or it should be made applicable only for Corporate Sector and keeping away the individual assessees from the ambit of 44AB audit. To know more details about this kindly logon to sahakaradarpana.kar.nic.in and link sahakaradarpana.kar.nic.in/ca/CAPanelOrder.aspx where you can see for yourself that how the limit for 44AB audit will work out for the assessment year 2013-14. The voluntary compliance of returns will come down if these restrictions are put for filing the returns of income. The tax collection process should be smooth.
    TUMKUR DISTRICT TAX BAR ASSOCIATION (REG.,)
    We request the Finance Minister to consider the facts and circumstances under which we are requesting for the amendment to 44AB or increasing the limits of the 44AB or restrict the 44AB to the corporate sector or where the public money is involved. And further we would like to remind your good self “What is the argument on the other side? Only this that no case has been found in which it has been done before. That argument does not appeal to me in the least. If we never do anything which has not been done before, we shall never get anywhere. The law will stand still whilst the rest of the world goes on; and that will be bad for both” (Denning L.J).
    Thanking you sir,
    Yours faithfully,
    For Tumkur Dist., Tax Bar Association (Reg.,)
    S.Prakash,
    Hon’President.
    Copy With Respects to:-
    1. The Chairman,
    Central Board of Direct Taxes,
    North Block, New Delhi-110001.
    2. Ms.Rita Dogra,
    Under Secretary to Govt. of India,
    Ministry of Corporate Affairs,
    Shastri Bhawan,
    “A” Wing, 5th Floor,
    Dr.Rajendra Prasad Road,
    New Delhi-110001.
    3. Shri.Rajesh Kumar Bhoot,
    Director (TPL-III),
    Central Board of Direct Taxes,
    North Block, New Delhi-110001.
    TUMKUR DISTRICT TAX BAR ASSOCIATION (REG.,)

  257. Balu & Anand says:

    At best this article appears to be flogging the dead horse again and again simply because the Cost Accountants cannot seem to gain the confidence of general public in the field of taxation and at worst, plain contempt to the numerous judgements delivered by various courts.

    Courts time and again have held that the Constitution guarantees equality only among equals and not among inequals. The CA’s CWA’s, CS’s and advocates are experts in their own fields and the law has recognized their area of expertise. No amount of churlish and childish behavior is going to make the advocates and CWA’s equal to a CA in the field of financial auditing just as a CA is not going to be equal to an Actuary in the field of insurance even if he has sufficient knowledge in the field. As far as the author’s claim about CA’s appearing in Courts for tax cases is concerned, he would do well to understand that those CA’s would have passed their law examinations and would be practising in High Courts and Supreme Court AFTER surrendering their Certificate of Practice issued by the ICAI. Nobody is preventing the advocates and CWA’s from passing the CA exam and getting a COP from ICAI and then do audit u/s 44AB.

    If the ideas of the author are taken seriously, we would soon hear the Cost Accountants demanding that they should be allowed to perform surgeries like Doctors because they also know how to hold a knife and cut open a person’s body. And hey, they can also call themselves Generals in the Indian Army. After all they would have shot with toy guns during Diwali when they were kids !!

    A final suggestion to some of the CWA’s who have claimed here that they find CA’s don’t have any practical knowledge: PLEASE IMPROVE YOUR ENGLISH FIRST. YOUR GRAMMAR MAKES ME SHUDDER. YOU GUYS CANNOT WRITE A TWO LINE REPORT.

  258. CA.PRAVINKUMAR.A says:

    I support the views of R.S.Shamasundar, Venkatesh.S, Jigar Shah,Mukesh Saran, Sanket Shah, Avardhana, Shailesh Kamdar, Chikkerur, Harshkumar Sharma and Bhavesh Savla.

    CAs are not charging fees which the advocates charge for their representation. If CAs are allowed to appear in Courts, the assessees can save substantial amount of money too. When every professionals have their own territory, why are they trying to enter into CAs’ circle.

    When members of other professional bodies are not supposed to get into CAs’ circle, where is the question of allowing Tax professionals (Non-CAs).
    Let them appear in exam to pass CA to certify for 44AB purpose or let CAs also to practice in Company secretarial matters, Cost audits and Court representions before letting other professionals to do the same.

  259. Ashok Jain says:

    It is like that the duties and responsibilities of Comptroller and Auditor General of India now also being performed by Attorney General of India. It seems that this article is written without application of mind.

  260. CA Vijay says:

    I think the above story is not helping any one….. Each professional are going through there own curriculum and the law is providing the responsibility based on each academic excellence. I think tomorrow the question would be why the CA are monopoly for conducting statutory audits and let others also do this without knowing ABCD for the same….

  261. Raghav Goyal says:

    This monopolist trust vested on Chartered Accountants was also upheld by the Supreme Court in the Case of T.D. Venkata Rao v. Union of India [1999] 237 ITR 315 (SC).In this instant case, T.D.Venkata Rao, an Income Tax Practitioner, had questioned the legal validity of allowing only CAs to Audit under section 44AB. Supreme Court upheld the superiority of CAs by noting that Chartered Accountants, by reason of their training have special aptitude in the matter of audits and no other person can be held eligible to conduct audit under Section 44AB. Supreme Court further held that CAs are a Class by themselves meaning that CAs are the brand for auditing itself.

  262. CA Suniiel R Karbhari says:

    Dear All,

    As the matter is decided by Hon SC , why any one should now give a thought to otherwise very well settled issue.

    Its nothing but creating unnecessary debate for nothing.

    Rather it will be worth noting from the Income Tax Dept , what contribution tax audit reports have made to their tax administration vs tax compliance since the introduction.

    Regards
    CA Suniiel R Karbhari

  263. CA PARIKSHIT SAVALIYA says:

    Dear Mr.B.S.K.RAO, Tax Advocate.

    For your questions.
    I kindly request you to do not compare any profession with just name of syllabus. You may please go through it and why tax professional ( Non CA ) should not try to clear CA Exams.

    If people got skills INDEED, i don’t think anybody find difficulty in clearing CA exams now-a-days. And can sing Report U/s44AB.

    I personally thinks that Every profession has its unique characters and values. And other professionals should respect them instead of making irrelevant issues.

    and please update your figure, as now practicing CAs are more then you stated.

  264. siddharth jain says:

    CA’s had a very distinctive knowledge in areas of audit… Look at syllabus of CWA or CS or LLB they just have basic idea of audit where as CA are trained extensively for audit… We make Accounting Standards… We make standards on auditing… First anlayze what other institutes have done in area of auditng…
    U will find CA are most responsible and qualified for audit work

  265. K Gopal Tulsyan says:

    There are some advocates who are exclusively dealing in taxation side only. ADVOCATE can only appeared in case of tribunal & high court. Advocate is also competent to check the account books prepared by the assessee. Keeping in view the advocates should also be authorised to audit the account books of the assessee. Appropriate steps should be taken by the finance department in this regard. 9415221371

  266. CA. M. Lakshmanan says:

    Dear Sir,
    It seems that the author of the article has not understood the nature of CA Course. It is a full time course with articleship of three year training under a CA. It can’t be equated with Advocates (who can complete a law course in any college) and the other two courses which can be done by correspondence while working and earning. The Indian CAs command respect all over the world because of the knowledge they posses after completing the course, which is considered to be toughest among all courses in the world.Further CAs are governed by strict code of conduct and ethics and the Disciplinary Committee of the Institute takes action against erring CAs. The anxiety of the author regarding non-availability of CAs for audit is a misnomer because till date there is no complaint from any assessee regarding non-availability of CAs for doing the audit.

  267. CA. Raviprakash says:

    Dear Krishna,

    Universal truth is that a doctors job cannot be got done by a nurse.
    Similarly the job of a CA.

    Pls. answer the reply of Mr. Jigarshah, Mr. Mukesh Savan, Mr. Avardhana, Mr. Chikkerur, and Mr. CA. Bhavesh Salva.

  268. R.NATARAJAN says:

    Mr. RAVI Davanagere,

    He is not suppose to comment openly on CAs as a whole as THEY ARE HAVING(FEEDING) BIG `SUITCASE” SO, Govt. has to relay on only 59,472 CA’s

  269. M. K. Sahu says:

    Dear Sir,

    I don’t agree with your views coz we all knows that you can appear for hearing matters in all the way from CIT (A) to SC whereas CA or CMA only can go upto CIT(A)and ITAT.
    it doesn’t means that CAs don’t have any knowledge regarding they only get power just because they know how can handle the accounts and compliance of Accounting and Auditing Standards just this is the matter and nothing else even then you are feeling that CAs don’t have knowledge then its upto you. i can’t say regarding your views.

  270. Ranjith says:

    So MR. Krishna

    What you say is just coz there are some rotten apples that get through quality check, as there are rotten apples let there be no quality check and mix all apples oranges, bananas and sell all of them as apples coz anyway they are all fruits???

    Sorry i dont see any sense in it

  271. Chandra says:

    I have one question ? CA are better qualified for tax practice because they have in depth knowledge of the subject, then why there is no such qualification or knowledge is required to become an ITO or Income-tax commissioner ? You will find ITO clearing his BA or an Engineer or Doctor(sometimesMBBS or MD) as Commissioner of Income-tax. There interpretaion of Act is sometime horrible and based on Additions/disallowance are made and they gets away with that and Assessees have to pay the price in the formof litigation, which some time years to clear.

  272. Vineet says:

    Dear Mr. B.S.K.RAO, Tax Advocate

    Interpretation of you “Being CA do Tax Audit that is creating a hurdle” is meaningless. Please change your outlook of being negative to Positive and do yours SWOT analysis. It will benefit you.

  273. krishna says:

    I support author, as i have seen in my expereince many CA’S, eventhogh they cleared ICAI’s exams, but still lack of practical application & knowledge., In my opinion all the qualification is equal (CA, CWA,CS, LAW etc.,) matter differes is – individual’s efficienty, competence, ability & commonsense.,

  274. Ranjith says:

    Dear All

    Looks who is talking about monopoly

    I am Laughing my heart out with the funny comments from all advocates over here.. really are you professionals so childish.. ( I am not a chartered Accountant so Not biased).

    Let me ask a question to all advocates here
    Say I am SSLC Passed and worked with an advocate for 10 years so i know some laws and how to handle law points will you so called BAR council allow me to take up cases in courts without me getting a law degree? You will insist on a degree right? So why is bar discouraging a practically law educated guy from entering bar???

    Now, You people are practicing in law and chartered accountants too, are well verse in certain laws(experts i should say), so why do you still not letting them enter courts and represent??? isnt CA enough Degree for you people??? again you want only Law graduates to monopolise in courts

    and just like in courts, you people just put in a big argument with almost zero knowledge of what you are talking.. CA/CMA/CS all starts which “C” that doesn’t mean all of them study same thing. still you talk big things

    and now, you advocates cant even handle your own work area and you people want more exposure to accounts. let me make one thing clear to you people, Knowing what debit and credit is and what balance sheet and p&l is doesn’t make you experts in accounts and taxation accounting.

    and for 54792 whatever number of chartered accountants are concerned, that shows the quality of CA institute that doesn’t let just anybody to pass and practice, unlike law where anybody who is SC/ST whatever or can mug up some law can easily pass.( i know what i am talking about)

  275. CA Amitkumar Savaj says:

    I continue next page,

    2.ICWAI every cost accounting compliance should be certified by cost accountant.
    3. C.A. Last and supreme authority in every country vested in one Chartered Accountants financial dedication of every country is decided on basis of what power has been reserved for chartered accountants ,so in india chartered accountants are created to compliance link between public & governments
    I kindly,request to central government that every income tax return should not be filed without certified by C.A.after that every loan proposal file must be
    certified by C.A.to sure about intention & credit worthy of assesses.
    4.Tax Consultant are not authorized to do any financial work in country at all
    because they are not proper experienced and required technical education.

    therefore,I request to government to give above mentioned power to respective professional because assesses don’t know the rules.act etc.if work is to be done only by proper professionals C.A.,C.S.,ICWAI Respectively then it is in interest of Governments only

    Thanking you,

  276. Mallikarjun Dev Ch. Adv says:

    Sir, In one way I agree with sri BSK Rao, That is under Advocates Act, it is only Law graduates entitled to practice under any Law and Incometax Act is no exception.
    At the same time CAs, cost actts, CSs are experts in their fields and all the Professional services are essential for successful functioning of any business or industrial organisation. Before Financing a project the Banker will obtain Legal opinion from an Advocate, Financial report from a CA, a valuation report from an Engineer. So on let CAs do.
    But practicing under the Income tax Act shall be exclusively given to the Advocates only. by the recent changes in Income tax Act makes only CAs as Tax professional, which is not correct. It is not the CA who is signing the Audit report representing the case before the Dept in many cases.

    I frankly ask my CA friends how many of them sparing how many days at least hours on each audit case before signing, not preparing the audit reports.
    Many a time, it has become an additional exercise on a bonafide assessee rather than rendering a useful purpose to the department.

  277. Amitkumar Savaj says:

    Dear friends,

    I request central government to give proper authority to every professional for which they are created,
    Eg. 1. CS are created for corporate law matters then every company which required to file any single page to ROC then it must be certified by any CS

  278. CS SHARADCHANDRA PATIL says:

    1. There is no difference of opinion about a CA doing a financial audit. He is specially trained for the job.

    2. The difference of opinion is about the tax practice as such. It is wrong to state that accounts are understood only by a CA. All other professionals (less advocates) and even Commerece Graduates / Post Graduates are capable of understanding accounts. Then why only CA and an advocate is permitted to put the digital signature on the tax returns of the clients?

    3. The taxation practice is about 50% accounts and about 50% law. The law is understood very well by all professionals including advocates. Then why a CA is given a special treatment?

  279. R S Shamasundar says:

    There are many chartered accountants with LL.B and LL.M qualifications. They are practicing as advocates specialized in tax practice. Similarly, why advocates, CS and CMA should not consider passing CA Exam and then take up tax practice.

  280. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    CERTIFICATE FROM CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS ONLY IN INDIA. IN OTHER COUNTRIES ON SOME OCCASIONS.
    i AM ALSO CONFUSED WHETHER TAX AUDIT IS A STATUTORY OR NOT.

    IF IT IS STATUTORY THEN A CA COULDN’T BE APPEAR ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE U/S 288(2) OF IT ACT 1961 IN WHICH CASE HE AUDITED THE ACCOUNTS. BECAUSE WHEN HE AUDIT ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE PERFORMING DUTY ON BEHALF OF GOVERNMENT.
    IT IS WELL SETTLED RULE OF THE LAW NOBODY APPEAR FOR BOTH PARTIES.

    regarding this i want to ask from CBDT. If any officer is read this comment

  281. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Dear Sir,
    First of all I want to say there is no benefit of audit u/s 44AB of income tax act 1961, it is just extra financial burden on assessee. Since 1984 object is fulfilled for which this section introduced.
    Secondly I want to say inflation increased more than 25 times & minimum auditing ceiling should be 10 crore for proprietorship,partnership concerns & professionals.
    third as per service act on legal services exempt from service tax & advocate only class u/s 29 of advocates act 1961, who deals in legal services not chartered accountant.

    AT LAST I FULLY AGREE WITH MR. BSK RAO ADVOCATE.

  282. Venkatesh S says:

    Dear Mr.Tax Advocate, what do you want to convey???…… Firstly you people coming from LLB background do not know ABCD of Accounts and you speak about accountancy….. Secondly your talk is based on “syllabus”. You base your talk on academics…….. CAs will go through 3 years internship and other course students will not. Please visit any commissioner’s office to realize actually Commissioner takes help from CAs. These CAs are hired by the authority on his own interest and not by any mandate. Mind the importance of CA in tax practice.

    So called Non-CA Tax professionals do not posses the required skills to discover the deliberate fraud.

    Lastly, my suggestion for you is you do not know the syllabus of CA curriculum. Kindly visit icai.org for curriculum.

  283. JIGAR SHAH says:

    Dear Sir

    It is not about the monopoly. Please don’t see from the point of view of your benefit. See it from the point of view of the benefit of the society as a whole. There are clearly duties defined for the respective professional bodies. Also the different bodies created for the fulfillment of their purpose. If all authority will be given to all professional bodies then there is no any purpose of creating different professional bodies. Let the CA to do their work. Let the CWA to do work in the area of Cost & Works accounts. Also for CS, their area in work related to Company law matters. So, from my point of view, you are creating point only for your benefit.. PLEASE THINK WIDELY…. AND IN THE INTEREST AND BENEFIT OF THE SOCIETY AS A WHOLE…

  284. CA. Mukesh Saran says:

    As per Guidance note on Issues in Tax Audit under Section 44AB of ICAI
    Purpose of Tax Audit:
    The purpose of Tax Audit is to ensure that books of Accounts have been maintained in accordance with the provisions of the Income Tax Act. Circular No.387 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes which has been annexed to the material circulated to you also highlights this fact. Accordingly a proper audit for tax purposes would ensure that proper records are being maintained, and that the accounts properly reflect the income reported by the Assessee. This audit effectively curbs Tax Evasion and ensures Tax Compliance. Tax Audit also ensures that the Accounts are properly being presented to the Assessing Officers when called for. The precious time of the Assessing Officers is also saved from the routine and ineffective verifications like checking of totals and vouching of Purchase and Sales transactions. They can devote their time in more important investigation aspects of a Case. Thus Tax Audit saves considerable time to the Income Tax Department.
    Who can carry out Tax Audit?
    After the applicability of Tax Audit, the next question arises regarding who can conduct Tax Audit. Section 44AB requires that the accounts should be audited by an Accountant. The explanation to Section 44AB states that the word accountant shall have the same meaning as the explanation to Section 288(2). The Explanation to Section 288(2) states that
    “accountant” means a chartered accountant within the meaning of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 (38 of 1949), and includes, in relation to any State, any person who by virtue of the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 226of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), is entitled to be appointed to act as an auditor of companies registered in that State.
    Section 226 of the Companies Act, 1956 says that a person holding a certificate issued by a Part B State may also be appointed as an auditor. But this provision has no relevance today. No person is eligible to be appointed as an auditor by virtue of this provision today. Hence effectively only a Chartered Accountant holding a valid Certificate of Practice can carry out Tax Audit under section 44AB. This proves the level of trust we has been entrusted with. It will be in the duty of us all future Chartered Accountants to uphold this trust. After all C and A are the Alphabets of trust.
    This monopolist trust vested on Chartered Accountants was also upheld by the Supreme Court in the Case of T.D. Venkata Rao v. Union of India [1999] 237 ITR 315 (SC).In this instant case, T.D.Venkata Rao, an Income Tax Practitioner, had questioned the legal validity of allowing only CAs to Audit under section 44AB. Supreme Court upheld the superiority of CAs by noting that Chartered Accountants, by reason of their training have special aptitude in the matter of audits and no other person can be held eligible to conduct audit under Section 44AB. Supreme Court further held that CAs are a Class by themselves meaning that CAs are the brand for auditing itself.

  285. S Koley says:

    I would like to differ with you on certain issues
    1. The syllabus of CA , CS and cost are in no way similiar and are quite different. The syllabus of the respective courses can be downloaded from the respective institution website.
    2. Section 139 of the Income Tax Act, deals with filing returns. I am unable to understand why there is any problem with compliance with this section. I have never known a fact where assessee have faced problems to find tax practicioners willing to file their returns.
    3. Voluntary compliance of the law depends on the willingness of the assessee and there is no regulatory bar on the same.
    4. Rest of the issues I will consider them as your personal opinion.

  286. Sanket Shah says:

    Mr. B S K rao ..why CA are not allowed in highcourt and supreme court . Why CA are not allowed for cost audit. I m not against it but all are given some advantages.

  287. avardhana says:

    why in high court and supreme court even tax cases are represented by advocates eventhough they are not conversant with practical aspects in taxation accounting? Why service tax is not applicable to advocates unlike CAs or similar professionals? Are they not providing service or something else? Whoever profess something, they treat that something with devotion, respect and try to protect it. But only advocates boycott courts, take law to their hands, when law provides many alternate routes for them, why? In our country one may have many questions, but no answers. Why no educational qualifications, no retirement age, immunity from all laws are there for political leaders? Who drafted that Law? Advocates or CAs? Time will answer all the queries. Only thing is we have to wait. An ape becoming a man has took several million years.

  288. Usman Ali Khan says:

    It is true that, chartered accountant are monopolising the tax profession, Tax consultants who are also practising in the field of income tax, VAT and service tax etc are forced to go the chartered accountants for certificates, even the tax departments give step motherly treatment to such tax consultants, discouraging many aspiring individuals to practice tax profession.

    In one way it is true that tax professionals need minimum qualification, knowledge and experience, but then India does not lack individuls having capacity to practice tax profession who are denied the oppertunity as such individuals are not chartered accountants.

    Hence it is apt for the government to authorise such individuals to paractice tax profession by authorising them to sign 44ab report etc., this oppertunity can be given to those persons having a degree as minimum qualification and by conducting an exam to test their ability to practice tax profession.

    Usman Ali Khan

  289. ASHOK GOYAL ADVOCATE says:

    There are some advocates who are exclusively dealing in taxation side only. Advocate is also competent to check the account books prepared by the assessee. Keeping in view the advocates should also be authorised to audit the account books of the assessee. Appropriate steps should be taken by the finance department in this regard. Ashok Goyal Advocate, Street Khazanchian, Sirsa. Mobile No.9416284878

  290. CA Shailesh Kamdar says:

    With this argument, CA, CS or CMA should also be allowed to appear before court. It will drastically reduce legal cost as lawyers are charging like extortion money.

  291. CA. CHIKKERUR says:

    Dear Sir

    With due respect, your argument on Tax Audit is vague & cannot be justifiable.

    Because lakhs together pending cases in various courts & quality of lawyers are not good ( you can see long queque for signing affadvait) CAs are much better with Tax knowledge. Do you urge Bar Council to allow CAs to practice even in HC & SC.

    Only because few attenders & nurses are better with medical knowledge can not be ground for allowing everyone to practice as a doctor.

    As per present scenario in India, even every degree holder allows to practice as lawyer, our court cases will be closed in next 10 years. So your argement on voluntary compliance by Assessee, CA & ICAI is hurdle is vague & Unjustifiable. Please make recommendation to Bar Council to allow CAs to take Tax & other matters too in HC & SC to help Assessee to complete appeals faster than of today

  292. SRIKRISHNA says:

    1. The publication is the reality of issue prevailing on date. I feel
    that Govt. does not want revenue, providing full employment to CA’s
    is the only motto of Central Board of Direct Taxes. It also indicates
    disability of CBDT to administer Income-Tax Act.

    2. Only solution for the problem is that Govt. should seriously consider
    passing of Tax Practitioners Bill either in the lines of Tax Agent Service
    Act of Australia (www.tpb.gov.au) or in the lines of Tax Practitioners
    Bill of South Africa (www.sars.gov.za) to generate tax professionals
    to fully support voluntary compliance in Indian taxation laws to enjoy
    the privilege of optimum tax collection by widening genuine tax base
    of assessees.

    3. In developed country’s like Australia 70% to 80% of population are under
    the tax net, whereas in India only little over 2% of population are under
    the tax net. This is mainly because of confining certification power only
    to CA’s in Income-Tax Act, 1961, barricading Non-CA Tax Professionals
    to enter tax profession

  293. RAVI Davanagere says:

    only CA’s are treated as Tax Professionals,BECAUSE THEY ARE HAVING(FEEDING) BIG `SUITCASE” SO, Govt. has to relay on only 59,472 CA’s

  294. Goutam says:

    If you start merging all professions, then everybody will start demanding the other profession’s work; like CA’s will start asking for Company Secretarial compliance, CS will ask for statutory audit work, CA/CS/CMA will start asking for representating clients at High Courts/Supreme Courts in their respective matters.

    It’s better to leave as it is and moreover instead of complaining, if one desires to do certain kind work, they should have achieve the prescribed qualification than asking for more autonomy in their profession.

  295. CA HARSHKUMAR SHARMA says:

    Dear Sir,

    Our Institute does not restrict to any person for pursuing Chartered Accountant course. If u have any problem regarding policy of the government for allowing C.A. only to certify certificates under Income Tax Act, u may pursue course & certify it after completion of CA. Our member never comments like this in respect of power and authority given only to CMA, CS for cost audit & Compliance Certificates respectively.

    Thanks

  296. Kailash goyal says:

    Dear Sir ,

    I am surprised to note the above comments , only experts in every field are permitted to carry out certain works to mange the entire system otherwise it will collapse.

  297. ADV.PRAKASH says:

    I ALSO SUPPORT THE AUTHOR ATLEAST SALES TAX AUDIT SHOULD BE GIVEN TO STATE ADOCATES IN TAXATION BY FOLLOWING NOMINAL PROCEDURE!!!!!

    PERSONAL THANKS TO AUTHOR

  298. Krish says:

    There is nothing which restricts any one from practicing cost ,financial or management accounts.CA or CMA is not required to practice these also.But the attestation of financial accounts under Companies Act is only for Chartered accounts and the said ammendment is not allowing the CMAs to do that work.They can only conduct cost audit.With due respects the compliance is not governed by tax audits. It is governed by the assesses mindset.All the tax professional can co-exists together as each one is possessing a different skill set and are required at various stages.Even for CAs also tax audit is not that lucarative as it was earlier as now better and more remunerative options exists

  299. CA. Bhavesh Savla says:

    And my last point now,will the author clarify that why under the service tax regime, it is only advocates who get the benefit of reverse charge? That is they do not have to pay service tax but it is the recipent who will pay? Why not such exemption is given to other professionals even though a client may have to draft an affidavit to submit before a tax auhtority which he can get done from either a CA or advocate. But the CA will have to charge Service tax and not advocate.

    Even in the previous service tax law, such preferential treatment was given to advocates where they got exemption under service taxes and not CA. Did our author-advocate make an issue out of this?

  300. CA. Bhavesh Savla says:

    And going by the same logic, then why are advocates so stubbornly resisting changes to the National Tax Tribunal where Chartered Accountants and other professionals will also be eligible to appear along with Advocates. it is because of this strong lobbying and stubborn stonewalling that the National Tax Tribunal has not been operative since the last decade and pendency of the cases is rising.

  301. CA. Bhavesh Savla says:

    It is surprising that the author claims to be an advocate but is not aware that the issue has already been decided by the Honourable Supreme Court in T.D. Venkata Rao v. Union of India [1999] 237 ITR 315 (SC). The Apex Court has made the following significant observations:

    “Chartered Accountants, by reason of their training have
    special aptitude in the matter of audits. It is reasonable that
    they, who form a class by themselves, should be required to
    audit the accounts of businesses whose income (sic: turnover)
    exceeds Rs.40 lakhs and professionals whose income (sic:
    gross receipts) exceeds Rs.10 lakhs in any given year. There is
    no material on record and indeed in our view, there cannot be
    that an income-tax practitioner has the same expertise as
    chartered accountants in the matter of accounts. For the same
    reasons the challenge under article 19 must fail, and it must be
    pointed out that these income-tax practitioners are still entitled
    to be authorised representatives of assessees.”

Leave a Reply

GET FREE EMAIL UPDATES