9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 659X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Council and thus dispose of the Reference levying penalty of reprimand upon the respondent; the penalty is envisaged by Section 21(6)(b) of the Chartered Accounts Act, 1949. - CHAT A. REF.2/2012 - - - Dated:- 12-8-2016 - MR. PRADEEP NANDRAJOG MS. PRATIBHA RANI JJ. Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Rakesh Aggarwal, Advocate with Mr.Pulkit Agarwal, Advocate Respondents Represented by: None. PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. (ORAL) 1. The reference made to this Court by the Institute of Chartered Accountants under Section 21(5) of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 has reached for hearing today. Whereas counsel as above appear for the Institute of Chartered Accountants, the first respondent who is the contesting respondent has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax had not passed any order to said effect. A copy of the communication was alleged by the complainant to have been sent to the CMD of National Hydro Power Corporation. It was further alleged by the complainant that the respondent solicited professional work through personal communications. 4. The complaint was taken cognizance of. A Disciplinary Committee was constituted which heard the complainant and the respondent and the evidence placed on record by the complainant. 5. Noting that there was evidence to establish that the respondent was filing the income tax returns of the complainant and his family members, the Committee noted that the respondent had filed a Civil Suit for recovery of the pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng soliciting work the Committee found that the writing was on a plain paper and not on the letter head of the firm of the respondent; it bore no signatures and thus was opined to be not indicative of being sent by the respondent. The complainant failed to establish that the communication originated from the respondent. Thus, the Committee absolved the respondent of said charge. The Committee also found that the complainant had not established the respondent having disclosed any information which he had accessed as a Chartered Accountant concerning the complainant to any other person. The Committee therefore opined that the respondent would be guilty of the first misconduct alleged i.e. annexing a note to the bill dated November 10, 2004 wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such manner as may be prescribed, and shall report the result of its inquiry to the Council. 11. Thus, a professional misconduct enumerated in the First Schedule of the Act would be a category by itself and other misconduct contemplated by Sub-Section (1) of Section 21 would have to be looked outside Part I of the First Schedule. It would be a conduct which any reasonable member of the society would frown upon. 12. Now, a professional who threatens a client would certainly commit a misconduct because the act is of a kind which is not expected by members of a civil society to be committed by a professional. 13. We concur with the view taken by the Council and thus dispose of the Reference levying penalty of reprimand upon the resp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
