A Disciplinary Committee of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) has found CA. Avik Kedia guilty of professional misconduct. The complaint was initiated by the Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi & Haryana. The committee’s findings, dated October 16, 2024, concluded that Kedia was negligent in his professional duties across three separate companies. Kedia admitted to several lapses during a hearing on January 6, 2025. These included his team incorrectly filing a company’s registered address, his own failure to disclose directorships while allowing a company to use his office as its registered address, and certifying e-forms without verifying subscriber details. Following his guilty plea, the committee determined that Kedia’s professional and other misconduct was established. As a result, the committee issued an order on January 20, 2025, reprimanding Kedia and imposing a fine of Rs. 25,000, which he must pay within 60 days.
THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA
(Setup by an Act of Parliament)
[DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE [BENCH-IV (2024-2025)]
[Constituted under Section 21B of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949]
ORDER UNDER SECTION 21B(3) OF THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS ACT, 1949 READ WITH RULE 19(1) OF THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS (PROCEDURE OF INVESTIGATIONS OF PROFESSIONAL AND OTHER MISCONDUCT AND CONDUCT OF CASES) RULES; 2007.
File No. [PR/76/22/DD)/98/2022/DC/1780/2023
Clubbed files: PR/G/277/2022;/PR/G/296/2022]
In the matter of:
The Registrar of Companies, NCT of Delhi & Haryana,
Through Sh. Manjit Singh, Deputy ROC,
O/o The Registrar of Companies,
Ministry of Corporate Affairs
…..Complainant
Versus
CA. Avik Kedia
Chartered Accountant
…..Respondent
MEMBERS PRESENT:
1. CA. Ranjeet Kumar Agarwal, Presiding Officer (In person)
2. Shri Jiwesh Nandan, I.A.S (Reid.), Government Nominee (In person)
3. Ms. Dakshita Das, I.R.A.S. (Retd.), Government Nominee (Through VC)
4. CA. Mangesh P Kinare, Member (In person)
5. CA. Abhay Chhajed, Member (In person)
DATE OF HEARING : 06th January 2025
DATE OF ORDER : 20th January 2025
1. That vide Findings dated 16.10.2024 under Rule 18(17) of the Chartered Accountants (Procedure of Investigations of Professional and Other Misconduct and Conduct of Cases) Rules, 2007, the Discip1inary Committee was inter-alia of the opinion that CA. Avik Kedia (hereinafter referred. to as the “Respondent”) is GUILTY of Professional and otlieri Misconduct falling within the meaning of Item (7) of Part-I of second Schedule and Item (2) of Part-IV of First Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act. 1949.
2. That pursuant to the said Findings, an action under Section 21B(3) of the Chartered Accountants (Amendment) Act, 2006 was contemplated against the Respondent and a communication was addressed to him thereby granting an opportunity of being heard in person/ through video conferencing and to make representation before the Committee on 06th Junuary 2025.
3. The Committee noted that on the date of the hearing on 06th January 2025, the Respondent was present through video conferencing. During the hearing, the Respondent stated that he had already slb-mitted his written representation dated 05th January 2025 on the Findings of the Commune. The Respondent sought leniency in the matter. The Committee also noted the written representation of the Respondent dated o5th January 2025 on the Findings of the Committee, which, nter alia, are given as under: –
a) With regards to M/s Sky Line Innovation Technology India Private Limited –
On 13.03.2021, When Form INC-22 was filed, he was not even present in his office in Gurugram. He accepts his team’s mistake of selecting wrongly “own office” button while filing Form INC-22.
b) With regards to M/s. Claravida Finserv Private Limited –
The registered the· Company was the official address of the Respondent. Since the promoters were known to him personally, he had no reservations about giving his address to the Company as a registered office address. Further, the list of director~hips should be
mentioned in th:e E-Form DIR-2, but same was not given and he accepts this non compliance.
c) With regards to M/s. Northlyf Tech Private Limited –
There is no requirement to attach “subscribers sheet”.as the e-MOA a·nd e-AOA already contains the details of the subscribers on· the last page itself wherein the DSC were attached.
4. The Committee considered the reasoning as contained in the Findings holding the Respondent ‘Guilty’ of Professional and Other Misconduct· vi-a-vis written and verbal representation of the Respondent.
5. Thus, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case,. material on record including written and verbal representation of the Respondent on the Findings, the Committee noted that the Respondent pleaded himself ‘Guilty’ to the charges alleged against him before it at the time of hearing and the Committee in terms of· Rule 18(8) of Chartered Accountants (Procedure of Investigations of Professional and Other Misconduct and Conduct of Cases) Rules, 2007 accordingly recorded his plea and decided to pursue. the case/ take action under Rule 19.
6. The Committee noted the submission of the Respondent in respect of M/s Northlyf Tech Private Limited and observed that declaration given by the Respondent in e-form Spice MOA and e-form Spice AOA was without verifying the details of subscribers and signatures which was in violation of the requirements of Rule 13(1) of the Companies (Incorporation) Rules, 2014. Further, in respect of the second Company, i.e., M/s Claravida Finserv Private Limited, the Committee noted that the Respondent had accepted that he had given his office premise as registered office to the Company. Further, in respect of third Company i.e. M/s Sky Line Innovation Private Limited that his office team has made mistake of selecting own office as registered office of the Company, the Committee opined that the registered office of the Company as mentioned in Form INC 22 certified by the Respondent was not the address of the Company and as such the Respondent is negligent in discharging his professional duties.
7. Hence, the Professionals and Other Misconduct on the part of the Respondent is clearly established as spelt out ln the Committee’s Findings dated 16th October 2024 which is to be read in consonance with the ilnstant Order being passed in the case.
8. Accordingly, the Committee was of the view that the ends of justice would be met if punishment is given to him in commensurate with his Professional Misconduct.
9. Thus, the Committee ordered that the Respondent i.e. CA. Avik Kedia, be REPRIM NDED and also imposed a FINE of Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty-Five thousand rupees only) upon him, which shall be paid within a period of 60 (sixty) days from the date of receipt of this Order.
Sd/-
(CA. RANJEET KUMAR AGARWAL)
PRESIDING OFFICER
Sd/-
(MS. DAKSHITA DAS, I.R.A.S.{RETD.})
GOVERNMENT NOMINEE
Sd/-
{SHRI JIWESH NANDAN , I.A.S.{RETD.})
GOVERNMENT OMINEE
Sd/-
(CA. MANGESH P KINARE)
MEMBER
Sd/-
(CA. ABHAY CHHAJED)
MEMBER
