Seven months after the arrest of two Price Waterhouse auditors in the scam at Satyam Computer Services Ltd, the accounting regulator has finally acted against one of them. The executive committe of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, or Icai, has decided to withdraw S. Gopalakrishnan from 11 of its committees.The non-standing committees included indirect tax, trade law and WTO. The decision would be officially communicated to Gopalakrishnan by tomorrow. Gopalakrishnan would continue as an ICAI member, sources added. The accounting regulator had come under intense criticism in the recent past for the lack of any specific action against two of the Price Waterhouse auditors involved in the Satyam scam, i.e. Talluri Srinivas and S Gopalakrishnan.

“The decision was taken to facilitate independent investigation and avoid conflict of interest in the further enquiry of the Satyam case,” said Uttam Prakash Agarwal, president of Icai. “However, S. Gopalakrishnan will continue to remain an Icai member as the final decision of our disciplinary committe is pending.”

Satyam founder S. Ramalinga Raju on 7 January confessed to doctoring the accounts of the software services provider to the tune of Rs. 7,136 crore over several years, triggering India’s biggest corporate fraud enquiry. The Hyderabad-based firm has since been bought by Tech Mahindra Ltd in an auction arranged by a government-constitu ted board.

More Under CA, CS, CMA

Posted Under

Category : CA, CS, CMA (3603)
Type : News (13251)
Tags : chartered accountants (550) ICAI (2503) indirect tax (58)

0 responses to “ICAI finally acted against PWC partner S. Gopalakrishnan ; withdrawn from its non-standing committees”

  1. Hiral says:

    When will PWC get banned along with all others involved in Satyam scam.

    India requires Quick Decisions committee to provide actions in a timely manner otherwise there will be more such scams, frauds as people will think in india we can commit crime and be safe as decisions come after a very long long time.

  2. lalit says:

    I do not understand why the institute if not banning the PWC itself, which has allowed the others to use its name by fully knowing that others are using their name. It is sad individuals are being targeted, who may be samll fries in the audit firm but the decision makers in the said audit firm are being left untouched. The fee earned has not gone to the pocekt of the individual members rather it has gone to the whole firm and the same has been shared by all the partners of that firm. All the partners more particularly the decision makers are guilty and all of them need to be banned,

Leave a Reply

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