Decision of the ICAI Central Council regarding various Malicious Emails being received by ICAI and its functionaries. – (12-06-2014)

No. 1-CA(7)/165/204 – Dated 17th April, 2014

The Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI), at its 329th (Adjourned) meeting held on 4th January, 2014, while taking note of various malicious emails being circulated in various fora has decided that:

The member(s) of ICAI should not host, display, upload, modify, publish, transmit, update, forward or share any information, in any form which is harmful, harassing, defamatory, indecent, immoral or invasive of another’s privacy, dignity or prestige or hateful, causing insult or injury or otherwise unlawful in any manner against the Institute and/ or its members. Further,

1.   Any member of ICAI, if found spreading such information, may invite disciplinary action under the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949.

2.   Besides above, ICAI may also initiate appropriate legal proceedings against such members circulating malicious emails under the applicable provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000 or under any other law for the time being in force.

All the members of the ICAI are hereby advised to take note of the above decision of the Council.

(T. Karthikeyan)
Secretary, ICAI


More Under CA, CS, CMA

Posted Under

Category : CA, CS, CMA (3574)
Type : News (13046)
Tags : ICAI (2386)

0 responses to “ICAI to take action against CAs spreading Malicious information against Institute and/ or its members”

  1. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Taxxguru Sir,

    I agree with your view most of the Indian Citizen does not even know CA Qualification is Diploma, Degree, Post Graduation or Doctrate. To which status CA/CMA/CA course should be compared ? Can any one explain with relevant supporting arguments.

  2. Taxxguru says:

    @ s sudarshana

    लगता हैं कि Legal Profession को किसीभी तरह से बदमान करना, उनके बारेमें अनापशनाप लिखना, कोर्ट arguments और कोर्ट प्रोसीडिंग्स के बारेमें गलत भ्रांतियां फैलाना यह Non-Legal Professionals का main motto हो गया है । उसके अनेक कारण हो सकते हैं :
    (१) चूँकि सभी Non-Legal Professionals गैर कानूनी एवंम unethical तौर से Legal Professional areas में काम करते हैं और उन्हें कोर्ट प्रोसीडिंग्स में भाग लेनेका मौका नहीं मिलता। असली skill तो Advocacy में, Analytical Court Argument & cross examination & verification में हैं ना की back office work में।
    (२) आम तौर पर Non-Legal Profession के काम/practice एक तरहसे उत्साहवर्धक नहीं होता, पब्लिक अपीयरेंस एवं मिडिया में किसीभी तरहसे चर्चा नहीं होती, पब्लिक इंटरेस्ट और पब्लिक इन्वॉल्वमेंट नहीं होता,
    (३) आम तौर पर Lawyers, Doctors, Engg., Businessman या फिर कला से संबंधित व्यक्तियो पर ही Films बनती है, मीडिया कवरेज मिलता है, Interviews लिए जाते है, इसलिए हो सकता है बाकि व्यक्तियों को या प्रोफेशनल्स को inferiority महसूस होती होगी क्यों की उन्हें यह सब नहीं मिलता।

    (४) Non-Legal Professionals अक्सर Long (5,10 …Years) Court Proceedings के बारे लिखते है या कहते है: पहली बात तो यह है की जनाब आप लोगो को Court Proceedings के बारेमे ज्ञान तो होता नहीं है। Court Proceedings में वादी-प्रतिवादी, एक से ज्यादा लोगोंका involvement होना, investigation, cross investigation, examination of witnesses, cross examination of witnesses करना, Other Agencies का दख़ल होना, भावनात्मकता, जात, धर्म, क्षेत्र इत्यादि विषयोंका केसेस में Natural Justice के साथ इन सब बातोंका judgement deliver करते समय संज्ञान लेना, ध्यान रखना (Lawyers द्वारा एवम Hon’ble Judges द्वारा) होता है। सिर्फ फॉर्म्स भरनेकी प्रोसेस नहीं होती है या Computer Software यहा पर यह सब चीजें नही कर सकता। क्योंकि Court Proceedings यह पूर्ण रूप से Human Talent-Analytical Skill इत्यादी बातों पे निर्भर होता है। और यह सब जस्टिस दिलानेके लिए होता है। ना की किसी को परेशान करने, किसीके फायदों के लिए (Exception are always every where).

  3. Taxxguru says:

    @ Venkat Dhanyamraju

    1) There are so many “Professional” bodies in India out if which Hon’ble “Bar Council of India” & “Medical Council of India” is the foremost Professional Bodies in India… Accounting & Secretary Professional Bodies are to Young in comparison to “Bar Council of India” & “Medical Council of India”.

    2) Therefore do not self-praise & exaggerate Accountants & Secretary Job.

    3) Most of the Citizen of India do not know who are Accountants & Secretaries?, what they really do? What type of education is there? Are they University or just private institute?…………. there are so many questions in the mind of most of the Indian Citizens in 21st Century itself…

  4. s sudarshana says:

    It is time, when the professionals are showing the tendency to show only they are knowledgeable, that the procedurre adopted in CAT (central administrative tribunal) that the victim/applicant himself can defend without the help of any lawyer. We should concentrate on the TRUTH AND FACTS rather than our ability to interpret/misinterpret the rule to the advantage of the client/s. Most of the cases are won or lost by the lawers by their argumentative skill than on merits.

  5. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Venkat Dhanyamraju Sir,

    (1) You should become CA only to work in the area of Financial Accounts
    (2) You should become CMA to work in the area of Cost Accounts, Financial Accounts & Management Accounts
    (3) You should become CS to practice company secretarial work

    And not practice law, which is the prerogative power of advocates. To practice law you should become advocate. Of course all CA/CMA/CS now authorised to conduct tax audit-Appropriate decision of Finance Ministry. I might have used most appropriate, if all persons authorised to prepare return are allowed to conduct tax law audit in Indian taxation laws

  6. B.S.K.RAO says:

    Venkat Dhanyamraju Sir,

    Tell legislature to withdraw the authority granted to Non-CA Tax Professionals to prepare return under Rule 12A of Income-Tax Rules 1962 read with Section 288(2) of Income-Tax Act, 1961. Then you will get answer to the question Sir.

  7. Venkat Dhanyamraju says:

    Dear All Respected Sirs

    If every one can do the Tax Audit and filing, then why we should become a Chartered Accountant. Like an RMP can never be a Certified Doctor, a Non-CA, Non-CMA, NON-CS, can never be a Certified professional.

    I respect the three professionals and we three should act in concert to protect the professional bodies and the members mututally

    venkat CA/CS/CMA Inter.

  8. B.S.K.RAO says:


    ICAI has said that act of Non-CA tax professionals for making an effort to approach a chartered accountant for getting signature for audit not conducted by him in itself is an unethical act which should be seriously viewed.

    Above opinion of ICAI (Financials) is the cause for expanding the definition of accountant in DTC-2013. Because, question raised in the minds of learned officials in finance ministry that how Non-CA Tax Professionals who are also authorised to prepare return give compliance in tax audit cases handled by them

    The above letter of ICAI (Financials) addressed to CBDT on 29.01.2013 & acknowledged on 30.01.2013

  9. B.S.K.RAO says:


    1. Wrong amendment in 2nd Proviso to Section 44AB of Income-Tax Act carried out in Finance Act, 2001
    2. Representation for concern of expanding the definition of accountant in DTC-2013 even though CAs are not disturbed.
    3. Mandatory upload of tax audit report without evaluating its utility for the purpose it was inserted in 1984
    4. Linking Section 44AD of Income-Tax to Section 44AB of Income-Tax Act taking away the whole Income-tax practice from Non-CA Tax Professionals
    5. Recent observation of Madras HC about functioning of ICAI (Financials)
    & decision in recent competition act

    Publication is the article in question & above are the proof for wrongful, illegal, selfish & malicious action

  10. MANDEEP SINGH says:

    Sh. BSK RAO JI YOU ARE RIGHT ON YOUR SIDE & CA SANDEEP KANOI IS RIGHT ON HIS SIDE. ICAI have given indirect threat to its members that nobody will raise voice against the acts of ICAI. It doesn’t matter that acts how may be harmfully for Indian assessees.
    sir we can’t blame to CA SANDEEP KANOI, Anybody commits same act if he standing on space where CA SANDEEP KANOI ji presently standing.

    It is condemn able act of ICAI, nobody’s right of speech should not be deprived by Indirect threat. NOBODY IS AGAINST ICAI BUT AGAINST THE PROVISIONS WHICH ARE UNNECESSARY FINANCIAL BURDEN ON ASSESSEES & STRICT HURDLE TO WIDEN GENUINE TAX BASE( Provisions as like TAX AUDIT BY CA’s u/s 44AB) irrespective that ICAI is regularly supporting that provisions since 1984.
    Sir, “selfish word” not used by any person with a motive to defame ICAI. Its only used to convey that ICAI always preferred interest of its members against the interest of indian assesses.


  11. ca. BHAVESH SAVLA says:

    It seems that BSK Rao is very much frustrated.

  12. B.S.K.RAO says:



  13. B.S.K.RAO says:



  14. B.S.K.RAO says:

    CA Sandeep Kanoi Sir,

    When ICAI (Financials) states that Act of Non-CA’s approaching CA for Tax Audit is un ethical & should be seriously viewed. What Non-CAs like that of me handling tax audit cases have to do Sir. Your arguments indicates ICAI (Financials) is a statutory body, therefore whatever action of ICAI (Financials) troubling the Assessees, Govt. & Public at large shoud be accepted blindly. India is democratic contry, tell me now who has to object the such action of statutory body affecting the public at large.

    • CA Sandeep Kanoi says:

      ICAI has said that act of Non-CA tax professionals for making an effort to approach a chartered accountant for getting signature for audit not conducted by him in itself is an unethical act which should be seriously viewed. I agree with the view of ICAI and in my view those who signed such audit reports and those who approached for such should be punished.

      Further I have never said that we should accept all the action of ICAI. I already told you that criticism on this website can only be in a healthy way, I never said that criticism cannot take place.

      We have published many of your article son this website and approved your 172 comments so how can you say that we asked you to refrain from making any comments.

  15. Subodh says:

    institute should open grievance cell in each and every branch and rc and central council, than member need not go to the outside to put there view, my personal experience with institute mechanism is not geared to Indian legal system and several time it follows the international body without appreciating local laws. instead of issuing gag order like this they must make there operation more transparent

  16. B.S.K.RAO says:



    • CA Sandeep Kanoi says:

      How can you say this just because its name have the word chartered in it? Do not forget that act been passed post Independence.

      The word Chartered means A written grant from the sovereign power of a country conferring certain rights and privileges on a person. A Chartered Accountant therefore should mean an accountant who has been conferred certain rights and privileges by the country.
      Who Charters?
      Governments instead of granting the powers to (chartering) each accountant, have delegated their power to the professional body of accountants (institute of chartered accountants of India in India). The professional body conducts courses/exams to grant membership to prospective candidates. The members of the body are deemed to have been chartered by the government. CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS [CA’s] are people who are chartered as accountants, by the professional body on behalf of the government.

      I once again say that Just because something is not in your favour doesn’t mean that everything done by a Institute working from so many years is wrong.

  17. B.S.K.RAO says:

    CA Sandeep Kanoi Sir,

    1. Whether comments made by ICAI (Financials) on me in the letter addressed to Sri.J.Saravanan, CBDT published by you is correct ?

    2. Wheter practice of Income-Tax law by Accountants correct ?

    3. Action of ICAI (Financials) snatching the food of others correct ?

    Kinldy answer my above questions sincerely

    • CA Sandeep Kanoi says:

      Dear Mr. Rao,

      I already said these issues we can debate on this website but in a healthy way. Further what I meant to say is that if we are not happy with certain provisions of the certain act then instead of criticizing ICAI we should try to get those provisions amended.

      I would rather like to refrain from making any comments on the issue and would like to facilitate the discussion on the same on the website.

      As far as snatching of food , I do not think its the correct term. All the professionals are aware that currently only CAs are allowed to conduct tax audits so those who wants to make a career in the field of tax audit have to become a CA or wait for an amendment in tax audit provisions.

  18. B.S.K.RAO says:

    CA Sandeep Kanoi Sir,

    In proposed DTC-2013, CA’s are not disturbed. In this situation, kindly answer my question sincerely, what we should call the representation of ICAI (Financials) about the issue Sir. Then, I will 100% abide with your kind directions given to me Sir. I hope that you will stand in my foot & think about the issue in question.

    • CA Sandeep Kanoi says:

      Dear BSK Rao,

      I am telling you to be constructive in your criticism and not I am not taking your right to air your view on any issue. This website is moderated by me and I do not want any un-parliamentary comments on this website. I am not commenting anything on the issue of tax audit. You are free to air/ raise your views but in a healthy way. I hope I am not demanding anything beyond your reach.

  19. s sudarshana says:

    C A Sandeep Kanoi:
    I concur with your views. Why to put that again and again, just because there is a easy tool of cut and paste!

  20. B.S.K.RAO says:

    President, ICAI (Financials)

    Its all because of wrongful, illegal, selfish & malicious action of ICAI (Financials). Members are misusing the ICAI an only act passed by parliament. MCA being the administrative authority of ICAI (Financials) should lift this veil.

    • CA Sandeep Kanoi says:

      Dear BSK Rao,

      I will further not allow you to use unconstitutional language against the ICAI. ICAI is a statutory body created by parliament. You may ask for the power given to it to be given to other bodies also but you can not say that ICAI is wrong in any of its action or its action are illegal, , selfish or malicious. All the Institutes work in the Interest of there members and ICAI is not wrong if it works in the interest of its members. I know you want Tax Audit power to be given to other professional institutes , while retaining the power of representation for advocates only, so at one side you want member of one institute to be stripped of work and other to get monopoly in work. As a admin of taxguru I respect the views of all Members of all the Institutions and see nothing wrong in demand of extension of tax audit to other professional bodies. But for that I do not think we should call ICAI Illegal, Selfish etc..

      Even otherwise power to extend such provisions to other professional bodies is with Government only and Government has already proposed the same in DTC. So its better to Make representation with Government instead of criticizing ICAI.

      • CA Sandeep Kanoi says:

        Please be constructive in your criticisam and raise the issues in a manner which everyone can understand.

  21. B.S.K.RAO says:

    (1) As per Section 288(2) of Income-Tax Act, 1961 eight class of persons are authorized to represent the assesses. Among them only following five class of persons are authorized to prepare return on behalf of assesses under Rule 12A of Income-Tax Rules, 1962

    (a) Legal Practitioners
    (b) Chartered Accountants
    (c) Cost & Management Accountants
    (d) Company Secretaries
    (e) Income-Tax Practitioners

    (2) Original Income-Tax Act, 1961 was fantastically drafted by learned officials in Finance Ministry & it was capable of meeting the expectation of the Govt. in all future events, except requiring amendments for events/changes taking place in this 21st Century. Disturbance to the original intention of legislature in Income-Tax Act, 1961 started in 1984 by the intervention of Institute of Chartered Accountants of India by way of inserting mandatory Tax Audit Certificate U/s 44AB by only Chartered Accountants. This was also cautioned by Sri.P.C.Padhi, former Chairman, Central Board of Revenue and Deputy Controller & Auditor General of India, Sri.D.K.Rangnekar former Editor, Economic Times, who were the members of Direct Taxes Committee, popularly known as Wanchoo Committee & gave dissenting note on the issue.

    (3) The word “Chartered” of The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (Financials) denotes some thing of a dominion state of affair as against Sovereign Independent Republic of India. On date, there are 46 Plus Mandatory CA Certificates in Income-Tax Act, which were inserted on the behest of ICAI (Financials) since from 1984. Because of 46 Plus mandatory CA Certificates in Income-Tax Act, 1961 Non-CA Tax Professionals viz. Legal Practitioners, Cost & Management Accountants, Company Secretaries & Income-Tax Practitioners can not exercise the authority granted in the statute fully & independently. This is practically causing strict hurdle for voluntary compliance. This position of Non-CA Tax Professionals is comparable to decree of court which can not be executed.

    (4) Audit means “verification”, depending on the purpose they are classified as Energy Audit, Environment Audit, Product Audit, Process 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 officers of Income-Tax Deptt. who come from different streams conducting audit in scrutiny assessment proceedings are not Chartered Accountants. In conclusion, person specialized in Income-Tax law should issue Certificates/Reports in Income-Tax Act.

    (5) On careful study of Section 288(2) of Income-Tax Act read with Rule 12A of Income-Tax Rules, it has to be presumed that all five class of persons referred in Para No.1 above possess knowledge of Section 145 read with 14 Accounting Standards of CBDT, required for Income-Tax Practice. Because certain qualification has been fixed in Income-Tax Act for these five class of persons. Further, Accounting Standard framed by ICAI (Financials) & IFRS not required for Income-Tax Practice. Here the question is, when such other four class of Non-CA Tax Professionals are authorized to prepare return under Rule 12A of Income-Tax Rules, there is no justification to prohibit them for issue of Certificates/Reports in Income-Tax Act. Therefore, it is clear that on introduction of CA Certificates in Income-Tax Act, original intention of legislature in Rule 12A of Income-Tax Rules has been struck down.

    (6) In the enclosed Tax Audit Data provided by DIT(S), it is evident that only 65,570 CA’s are practicing throughout India. Due to Tax Audit ceiling, Non-CA Tax Professionals handling tax audit cases have to roam around in search of empty slots of CA Signature to give compliance in case of their clients during due dates. This has also resulted in high cost of compliance, due to high demand & extra payment made for reservation of empty slots of CA Signature. CA Certificates in Income-Tax Act are causing strict hurdle for voluntary compliance not only in Income-Tax Act, but also in other Central and State Govt. taxation laws. In another 10 years, Non-CA’s who entered the Tax Profession in 1980’s will all eliminate & Govt. has to relay on only CA’s for seeking compliance under all Indian taxation laws.

    (7) Particulars of Total Income-tax admitted in tax audit cases for Asst. Year 2012-13 & 2013-14 that relates to return filed in ITR-4, 5 & 6 as provided by CPC, Bangalore as at 28.05.2014 are as under:-

    Particulars………………..Asst. Year 2012-13….Asst. Year 2013-14

    Income-Tax Admitted in ITR-4…Rs. 23,986 Crores..Rs. 23,952 Crores
    Income-Tax Admitted in ITR-5…Rs. 20,712 Crores..Rs. 21,556 Crores
    Income-Tax Admitted in ITR-6…Rs. 2,92,266 Crores..Rs. 2,34,456 Crores

    Margin derived by farmers is not taxed in Income-Tax Act, but margin derived by next sellers of such agricultural output is taxed in their hands in Income-Tax Act. Presuming the output of corporate assessees reach the ultimate consumer in three stages & considering tax admission in corporate case & 50% of such corporate assessees do business with non-corporates covered by tax audit, who are in between the corporates & retailers and also considering non-corporates engaged in service sector, I am of the strong view that combined Income-Tax admission as per return filed in ITR-4 & 5 covered by tax audit U/s. 44AB should have crossed at least Rs. 15,00,000/-Crores. (Basis being 80:20 ratio of Ag. & Ind. Output).

    (8) In latest e-filing website of Income-Tax Deptt. only CA’s are treated as Tax Professionals with special login to upload CA Certificates (Impracticable procedure), without which Non-CA Tax Professional can not give compliance to the Deptt., if given his clients are under the risk of penal provision. These CA Certificates barricade support for voluntary compliance from Non-CA Tax Professionals & new Non-CA Tax Professionals are not entering tax profession on one hand and total number of practicing CA’s are not increasing on the other hand (Considering the output & death rate of practicing CA’s).

    (9) Indian legislature provided special class of persons called Advocates in Advocates Act, 1961 to practice all Indian laws. Therefore, appearance clause not yet all required in any Indian statute. Bar Council of India Vs A.K.Balaji [SLP (Civil) No(s) 17150-17154/2012] Dt.04.07.2012 (SC) and A.K.Balaji Vs Govt. of India (2012) 35 KLR 290 21.02.2012 (Madras HC) it was clearly held by Hon’ble Supreme Court & Madras High Court that Advocates alone are entitled to practice the Profession of Law both in litigious & non-litigious matters, nullifying the effect of Section 33 of Advocates Act. This also confirms to Section 29 of Advocates Act. The verdict of Supreme Court is the declared law of land, binding on all throughout the territory of India under Article 141 of Indian Constitution & contravention liable for action under Article 129 read with Article 142(2) of Indian Constitution. Income-Tax Act being “LAW” Advocates alone are entitled to Practice, Plead & Act before the assessing officers of Income-Tax Deptt. On date, appearance clause Section 288(2) of Income-Tax Act has been subjected to review of Apex Court.

    (10) Furnishing Certificate & Reports in Income-Tax Act require both interpretation of facts & law. Interpretation of facts is not a tough job, but interpretation of law is a tough job. Practice of law is the Prerogative Power of Advocates in India. Whereas practice of Cost Accounts, Management Accounts & Financial Accounts are not the prerogative powers of respective professional body. Because, penalty has been prescribed U/s 45 of Advocates Act, 1961 for persons illegally practicing the Profession of Law. Under Indian Constitution CAG are the Auditors with wide powers, carrying out meaningful job. Due to T.D.Venkat Rao (SC) case only Chartered Accountant issue Tax Audit Certificate in Income-Tax Act. In view latest verdict in the case of Bar Council of India Vs A.K.Balaji (SC) Section 288(2) of Income-Tax Act require deletion from the the statute. In the result only CAs will conduct Tax Audit & only Advocate will plead & act before the Income-Tax Authorities. Can any one imagine the ill effect of this situation to Govt. revenue & troubling assessees to approach more than one Tax Professional to give compliance in Income-Tax Act.

    (11)In developed countries like Australia 70% to 80% of population are under tax net, whereas in India only 2% of population are under tax net. This is because of confining certification powers only to Chartered Accountants in Income-Tax Act, 1961 as discussed above. On date ample tax compliance work is there, but there is no required Tax Professionals to support voluntary compliance. I hope that Ministry of Finance will consider my above submissions & make necessary amendments to Income-Tax Act/Direct Taxes Code, keeping in mind that “more persons in the line of tax practice more revenue”.

    • CA Sandeep Kanoi says:

      Dear Mr. Rao,

      Please do not put same comments again and again – As we do not like to have spamming of comments on our website.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *