The Council, at its 306th meeting held from 7th to 9th June, 2011, while considering Item No.30 relating to Notification of Benefits of Registered OCI u/s 7B(1) of Citizenship Act, 1955, decided to constitute a Group to consider appropriate steps for identifying a qualification bridging mechanism in line with the arrangements in place for MOUs/MRAs with accounting bodies and feasibility of considering provision to be prescribed for licensing of Overseas Citizens of India on terms and conditions which will be worked out by the Special Group in ICAI.
In continuation to the Institute’s Notification No. 13-CA (EXAM)/M/2011 dated 12th January, 2011, it is notified for the general information that Group – 1, Paper – 1 – Accounting of Integrated Professional Competence Examination held on 3rd May – 2011 in respect of Ms. Grishma Nadiq, Roll No. – 129394 whose Answer book was reported to be missing stands cancelled. The said examination will now be held again on 25th, July, 2011 from 10.00 AM to 1.00 PM.
The Reserve Bank of India has imposed a monetary penalty of ` 25.00 lakh (Rupees twenty five lakh only) on Citibank N.A., in exercise of powers vested in it under the provisions of Section 47(A)(1)(b) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 for contravention of various guidelines and instructions relating to Know Your Bank (KYC)/Anti Money Laundering (AML) issued by the Reserve Bank of India. The failure in following the KYC/AML guidelines while opening accounts led to the perpetration of a fraud at its Gurgaon branch.
NISCHINTAPUR TEA CO. LTD Versus SUBRATA SEN & ORS ( Calcutta High Court) – An application under Section 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) was filed in this court way back in 1985. It was numbered as C.P. No. 252 of 1985. It is still pending. The petitioner in that application was one Amita Sen, who has since died. In her place, her three sons Subrata, Ranjan and Sanjay are now substituted as petitioners being petitioner nos. 1.(a), (b) and (c).Two applications were heard by me for several days. They were most seriously contested. One of them (C.A. No. 686 of 2010) was an application by the company for dismissal of the Section 397, 398 application. One Ajit Kumar Agarwal, opposed this application as an intervenor. It was strenuously argued on his behalf that the company should not be granted the prayers. Neither, the petitioners in the Section 397, 398 application should be allowed to withdraw from the application. He made an application (C.A. No. 721 of 2010)for dismissal of C.A. 686 of 2010.
De Nora India Limited Versus Union Of India And Ors (Delhi HC) The challenge in this writ petition by De Nora India Limited („DNIL‟) [formerly known as Titanor Components Limited („TCL‟)] is to an order dated 12th August 2010 passed by the Department of Commerce („DOC‟) (Supply Division) in the Ministry of Commerce and Industry („MOCI‟), Government of India partly allowing the appeal of DNIL and upholding the order dated 22nd February 2010 by the Director General of Supplies and Disposals („DGS&D‟) banning DNIL from dealing with all the departments/ministries/offices of the Government of India but reducing the period of ban from five years to a period of one year operative from 22nd February 2010 and in relation only to tender notices of the DGS&D.
