9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1111X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ute of Chartered Accountants of India & Ors vs. P. Rama Krishna & Anr. 3. The transitional provision, being Section 21D, when on November 17, 2016 the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 was amended has been interpreted by the Division Bench. 4. Section 21D reads as under:- "D. Transitional Provisions. All complaints pending before the Council or any inquiry initiated by the Disciplinary Committee or any reference or appeal made to a High Court prior to the commencement of the Chartered Accountants (Amendment) Act, 2006, shall continue to be governed by the provisions of this Act, as if this Act had not been amended by the Chartered Accountants (Amendment) Act, 2006." 5. In para 37, the Division Bench held as under:- "37. The inte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Act. 8. The facts we need to note in the instant case are that a complaint was received by the Council on November 06, 2002. Correspondences ensued between the council and Megha & Associates, the firm of Chartered Accountants. Clarifications sought not being granted, the matter was treated as information and in accordance with regulation 12(6) of the Chartered Accountants Regulations 1988, a letter was issued by the Council on December 30, 2005 calling upon the firm of chartered accountants to disclose the name of the members answerable to the charges. The respondent submitted his written statement of defences on July 25, 2006 i.e. much before the Act was amended on November 17, 2006. 9. We accordingly hold the reference to be maintaina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are. He had travelled by AC Second Class due to seat in the AC First Class not being available for the return journey. The Disciplinary Committee itself noted that it was a case of casualness and not an act done with an intention to cheat. The Disciplinary Committee has noted that the travel was at a short notice and in a rush season. 6. In our opinion the proposed penalty would be disproportionate to the gravity of the wrong and especially keeping in view that there is no evidence that the respondent was paid for travel by AC First Class. The evidence is only to the effect that he travelled by AC Second Class but raised a bill for travel by AC First Class. 7. Though it may be a case where penalty of reprimand would suffice, but we refrai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
