The Disciplinary Committee of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) has ordered the removal of Chartered Accountant Praveen Murarka from its register for a period of six months. The order, issued on February 8, 2025, follows a finding that Murarka was guilty of professional misconduct under the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949. The committee found that Murarka failed to exercise due diligence and demonstrated a casual approach in his professional duties. Specifically, he was found to have certified e-forms containing false, incorrect, and incomplete information for multiple companies, including M/s. Fin Black Rock Private Limited, M/s. Inwin Logistics Private Limited, and M/s. Clean Harbours Private Limited. The committee noted discrepancies in signatures and addresses, as well as the certification of documents using a surrendered PAN card. Despite being given multiple opportunities to appear before the committee and provide a representation, Murarka failed to do so, leading the matter to be decided ex-parte. The six-month removal from the register will run consecutively with a separate punishment awarded in another disciplinary case.
THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA
(Set up by an Act of Parliament)
[DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE [BENCH-IV (2024-2025)]
[Constituted under Section 216 of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949]
ORDER UNDER SECTION 216(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.
[PR/G/27/22/DD/83/2022/DC/1730/2023]
In the matter of:
Ms. Kamna Sharma,
Versus
Praveen Murarka
MEMBERS PRESENT:
1. CA. Ranjeet Kumar Agarwal, Presiding Officer (In person)
2. Shri Jiwesh Nandan, IAS (Retd.), Government Nominee (in person)
3. MS. Dakshita Das, I.R.A.S. (Retd.), Government Nominee (In person )
4. CA. Mangesh P Kinare, •Member (through VC)
5.CA. Abhay Chhajed, Member (through VC)
DATE OF HEARING : 03rd February 2025
DATE OF ORDER : 08th February 2025
1. That vide Findings dated 30/12/2024 under Rule 18(17) of the Chartered Accountants (Procedure of Investigations of Professional and Other Misconduct and Conduct of Cases) Rules, 2007, the Disciplinary Committee was inter-alia of the opinion that CA. Praveen Murarka (hereinafter referred to as the Respondent”) is GUILTY of Professional Misconduct falling within the meaning of Item (7) of Part I of Second Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949.
2. That pursuant to the said Findings, an action under Section 2113(3) of the Chartered Accountants (Amendment) Act, 2006 was contemplated against the Respondent and communication(s) were addressed to him thereby granting opportunity of being heard in person/ through video conferencing and to make representation before the Committee on 20/01/2025 and 03/02/2025.
3. The Committee noted that this case was fixed before it for award of punishment under Rule 19(1) of the Chartered Accountants (Procedure of Investigations of Professional and Other Misconduct and Conduct of Cases) Rules, 2007. The Committee noted that the Respondent vide email dated 19/01/2025 had sought adjournment for the meeting held on 20/01/2025, which was acceded to by it. The Committee, however, provided a final opportunity to the Respondent to appear before it before passing any Order against him. The Committee directed the office to inform the Respondent to appear before it at the time of the next listing and in case of his failure to appear, the matter would be decided ex-parte based upon the documents and material available on record. The Committee further noted that the Respondent had neither filed any written representation on the findings of the Committee in captioned case nor had appeared before it despite the fad that he was specifically informed through notice dated 22/01/2025 to appear in the hearing fixed on 03/02/2025 failing which the matter would be decided ex-parte. Moreover, the Committee observed that this case was fixed six times before it for hearing(s) under Rule 18 of the Chartered Accountants (Procedure of Investigations of Professional and Other Misconduct and Conduct of Cases) Rules; 2007, however, the Respondent did not appear before it, and the Committee had decided the matter ex-parte at the stage of Rule 18.
4. The Committee considered the reasoning as contained in the Findings holding the Respondent ‘Guilty’ of Professional Misconduct. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and material on record, the Committee noted that as regards charge related to M/s. Fin Black Rock Private Limited (Formerly known as M/s. Sunhara Bird India Private Limited) —signatures of Mr. Charlie Peng in Form DIR – 2 was different in comparison with signatures as contained in PAN card and self-attested copy of Aadhar card of Mr. Charlie Peng which were part of Form DIR — 12 filed in case of M/s. OTA New Delhi Private Limited. Further, despite knowing that PAN card of Mr. Charlie Peng was already surrendered on 05′ March 2018, the Respondent had certified the DIR-12 Form on 16th March 2018 containing Form DIR-2 which mentioned PAN which was already surrendered by the Director. Moreover, request/consent letter dated 15/03/2015 of Mr. Charlie Peng to become the Director of the Company, was not signed by Mr. Charlie Peng. The Committee viewed that the Respondent’s declaration given in Form DIR — 12 that he has verified the particulars including attachments and found them to be true, correct and complete, was factually not correct. The Committee thus viewed that the Respondent has adopted a very casual approach while certifying the Form DIR — 12 as he had submitted the records/ papers/ documents containing false/ misleading information with Government authorities.
5. As regards charges related to M/s. inwin Logistics Private Limited—the Committee observed that signatures of Mr. Charlie Peng as contained in attachments filed with SPICe Form i.e. affidavit(s) in Form(s) INC 9, INC, 10 and DIR — 2 of subject Company were different in comparison with signatures of Mr. Charlie Peng as contained in Form DIR — 2 filed in case of M/s. Fin Black Rock Private Limited. Further, signatures contained in PAN card and self-attested copy of Aadhar card of Mr. Charlie Peng are also not tallying with signatures contained in attachments filed with SPICe Form. In view of his, the Committee was of the opinion that it was the duty of Respondent to check, and upload correct, complete and valid documents with Government authorities, which the Respondent failed to do so. Thereafter, the Committee observed that the Company name entered in an Affidavit, STK — 4 (which is the main supporting attachment) and actual name of the Company are different and that cannot be a mere typographical error that clearly shows casual approach and gross negligence of the Respondent. Thus, the Committee viewed that the Respondent has adopted a casual approach towards his professional duties.
6. As regards charges related to M/s. Clean Harbours Private Limited — the Committee observed that the Respondent had admitted his mistake and submitted that Director of the Company was having two addresses. The Committee was of the view that a Chartered Accountant is required to verify the authenticity and completeness of the documents while certifying e-forms, however, the Respondent did not exercise due diligence in conduct of his professional duties as there were different addresses of the Director in the attachments filed with SPICe INC — 32.. Hence, the Professional Misconduct on the part of the Respondent is clearly established as spelt out in the Committee’s Findings dated 30th December 2024 which is to be read in consonance with the instant Order being passed in the case.
7. 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.
8. Thus, the Committee ordered that the name of the Respondent i.e. CA. Praveen Murarka, be removed from the Register of members for a period of 06 (Six) months under Section 218(3)(b) of the Chartered Accountants Act 1949. The Committee further directed that this punishment order is independent and shall run consecutive to the punishment awarded to the Respondent in another disciplinary case [i.e. PR/G/47/22/DD/355/2022/DC/1698/2022].
Sd/-
(CA. RANJEET KUMARAGARINAL)
PRESIDING OFFICER
Sd/-
(SHRI JIWESH NAN DAN, t.A.S. {RETD.})
GOVERNMENT NOMINEE
Sd/-
(MS. DAKSHITA DAS, I.R.A.S.{RETD.})
GOVERNMENT NOMINEE
Sd/-
(CA. MANGESH P KINARE)
MEMBER
Sd/-
(CA. ABHAY CHHAJED)
MEMBER
