9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 373X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts / Appellants for whom early hearing the appeal was very crucial as they had approached this Appellate Tribunal within a week of the impugned order and interim reliefs were also given in a very short time frame, neither availed this window of three months plus nor even intimated a date to the Registry as stated in the Court on 06.04.2018. Responding to the administrative order dated 18.06.2018 the Applicants / Appellants in an affidavit submitted that the counsel for the parties could not fix an immediate future date of hearing because of the vacation of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court during 07.05.2018 to 02.06.2018 and the vacation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court between 20.05.2018 to 01.07.2018. Therefore, on 19.06.2018 when the matter was taken up 06.08.2018 was sought as the convenient date under the expectation that a new Presiding Officer would be in position soon after the earlier Presiding Officer demitted office. They also pleaded that there were only 29 working days available during 06.04.2018 – 19.06.2018, the vacation period. Thus no merit in the above submissions of the Applicants / Appellants. Even by their own submissions there were 29 working days during the va ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ior Counsel for the Applicants / Appellants Shri Janak Dwarkadas argued in detail that the prayer to extend the period of interim relief till 31.03.2020 is because seven clients of the Applicants / Appellants follow calendar year as their accounting year and the remaining clients have financial year as their account year. The former set of clients need to take decision regarding appointment of their auditor any time now and the later set of clients also need to take a similar decision in the next few months. Further, decision regarding the appointment / change of auditor is a time consuming one with onerous procedural requirements. It is also submitted by the Applicants / Appellants that a few clients have already written to them seeking update of the appeal pending before this Appellate Tribunal so that those clients could take an early decision relating to engaging their auditor for the ensuing accounting year. 3. Through the interim relief already granted by this Appellate Tribunal the Applicants / Appellants have been allowed to carry out the auditing assignments of only their existing clients, list of which was given to the Appellate Tribunal as ordered. As such, the Applic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f events is crucial in deciding this Miscellaneous Application the same is given below:- (a) 10.01.2018 SEBI issued the order impugned in Appeal No. 6 of 2018 (as well as in Appeal No. 7 of 2018). The said order, inter alia, directed that entities / firms practicing as Chartered Accountants in India under the brand and banner of PW, shall not directly or indirectly issue any certificate of audit of listed companies, compliance of obligations of listed companies and intermediaries registered with SEBI and the requirements under the SEBI Act, 1992, the SCRA 1956, the Depositories Act, 1996, those provisions of the Companies Act 2013 which are administered by SEBI under section 24 thereof, the Rules, Regulations and Guidelines made under those Acts which are administered by SEBI for a period of two years. However, Applicants / Appellants were allowed to complete their ongoing tasks till 31.03.2018. (b) 17.01.2018 Appeal mentioned by counsel for the Applicants / Appellants, seeking early hearing. (c) 19.01.2018 Interim prayers heard and disposed of by this Appellate Tribunal giving relief in continuing to provide auditing services to existing clients till 31.12.201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellants shall be allowed to carry on the audit / certification work of their existing clients. We modify our order dated 19th January, 2018 because of the peculiarity of situation which has arisen on account of one of us is demitting the office on 19th February, 2018 and only a Division Bench will be in a position to hear the matter. (emphasis added) 12. Shri Ravi Kadam and Shri Kevic Setalvad, learned Senior Counsel at the end of the matter have prayed for stay of this additional interim relief. We do not find any good reason to stay the present order. Ordered accordingly. 13. By consent, stand over to 23rd March, 2018. Registry is directed to list these appeals before an appropriate Bench on the said date. ( emphasis added) 8. It is very clear that the 15.02.2018 order provided only a pro tem benefit to the Applicants / Appellants since the interim benefit was till 31.03.2019 or a Division Bench takes an appropriate final decision in the matter. The question of appropriate Bench had arisen since the then Presiding Officer had recused himself from hearing the appeals when the matter was mentioned on 17.01.2018. Therefore, these appeals were heard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fs were also given in a very short time frame, neither availed this window of three months plus nor even intimated a date to the Registry as stated in the Court on 06.04.2018. 10. Responding to the administrative order dated 18.06.2018 the Applicants / Appellants in an affidavit submitted that the counsel for the parties could not fix an immediate future date of hearing because of the vacation of the Hon ble Bombay High Court during 07.05.2018 to 02.06.2018 and the vacation of the Hon ble Supreme Court between 20.05.2018 to 01.07.2018. Therefore, on 19.06.2018 when the matter was taken up 06.08.2018 was sought as the convenient date under the expectation that a new Presiding Officer would be in position soon after the earlier Presiding Officer demitted office. They also pleaded that there were only 29 working days available during 06.04.2018 19.06.2018, the vacation period. 11. I find no merit in the above submissions of the Applicants / Appellants. Even by their own submissions there were 29 working days during the vacation of the Supreme Court / High Court. This Appellate Tribunal has had no vacation at all. Even assuming that the Applicants / Appellants were really in tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
