Case Law Details
Wholesale Trading Service Pvt. Ltd. Vs ICAI (Delhi High Court)
Conclusion: Since Appellant-company was carrying on the activity of filing and pursuing complaints against various Chartered Accountants as an organised activity, independent of the objects for which it was incorporated, therefore, it was held that litigants, such as assessee, who had made litigation their business/vocation ought to be discouraged by levying costs of Rs. 100,000/- as the conduct of ICAI’s member (a Chartered Accountant) was to be evaluated by the concerned authorities of ICAI not the concern of Appellant-company.
Held: Appellant- private company alleged that HA- practising Chartered was guilty of professional misconduct on account of verifying forms (Forms-23 AC) containing false statements filed in respect of seven separate companies in respect of various financial years commencing from the financial year 2009-10 to 201 3-14. It filed a complaint with ICAI alleging that HA was guilty of professional misconduct as stipulated under Clauses (5) to (9) of Part-I of the Second Schedule of the Act. In this case it was found that Appellant-company had been filing repeated complaints against various Chartered Accountants and had been pursuing them almost on a professional scale. Appellant-company had not produced any material on record to establish that Hasham, as a matter of right, controlled the composition of the Board of Directors of any of the other companies. The companies in question were closely held private companies and there was no element of public interest involved in the complaint made. The conduct of ICAI’s member (a Chartered Accountant) is to be evaluated by the concerned authorities of ICAI. The object is to ensure that its members measure up to the standards as set by ICAI for continuing as its member. As stated earlier, the matter was, essentially, between ICAI and its members. This was also the rationale for not providing any appellate remedy to the complainant against the decision of the concerned authorities in terms of Section 22G of the Act. This right was only available to an aggrieved Member of ICAI. As notice above, assessee had been pursuing complaints against various members of ICAI with relentless fervour and had filed various petitions before this Court in pursuance of its complaints. It was held that litigants, such as assessee, who had made litigation their business/vocation ought to be discouraged. This Court had, in an earlier writ petition filed by assessee dismissed the petition with costs of ₹10,000/-, however, that did not seem to have discouraged Appellant-company from filing such petitions. Thus, the present petition was dismissed with costs quantified at ₹1 ,00,000/- (One Lakh Rupees Only).
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER / JUDGEMENT
1. The petitioner is a private company and its registered office is located in Chennai. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning the order dated 26th February, 2018, passed by respondent no.2 (hereafter ‘Board of Discipline’). By the said order, the petitioner was informed that the Board of Discipline had concurred with the prima facie opinion of the Director (Discipline) of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (hereafter ‘ICAI’) recorded on 6th October, 2017, holding that respondent no. 3 ( Mr. H. Anil—hereafter ‘HA’) was not guilty of professional misconduct falling within the meaning of Clauses (5) to (9) of Part I of the Second Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 (hereafter ‘the Act’).
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
I just want to know wich schedule number and attachment format is required to fill complaint against CA