TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 438X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onfidence and not only his client, but even in Department in which Chartered Accountant represents the matter of his client, normally believe that he (Chartered Accountant) is performing his duties honestly. Confidence has been breached by respondent not only with the persons, who engaged him, but it has played fraud on the Department also. He is admittedly a person of having long-standing in the profession, still has shown such a conduct, which can never be expected of a Chartered Accountant. In the circumstances, ICAI has recommended removal of name of respondent from the register of Member for a period of two years. Looking to the conduct of respondent, and the tactics adopted by him in delaying proceedings, stretching it to almost one and half decade, in our view, appropriate punishment would be removal of his name from Membership of the Institute for a period of five years. - Reference Against Misc. Acts No. 1 of 1999 - - - Dated:- 25-4-2017 - Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal And Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, JJ. For the Applicant : Vinod Swarup For the Opposite Party : Shambhu Chopra, Rahul Sahai ORDER ( Delivered by Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal, J. u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is pending, therefore, enquiry should be deferred. 6. DC fixed 5th October, 1981 and decided to examine witnesses of Income Tax Department on that date. The first meeting of DC for the purpose of enquiry was held on 5th October, 1981 at New Delhi when respondent was absent though two witnesses namely, Sri T.D.Chandna, Income Tax Officer, Aligarh and Sri R.K.Mittal, Income Tax Officer, Agra were present. Respondent vide letter dated 4th October, 1981, sought adjournment on the ground of serious illness. 7. ICAI sent letters communicating decision of holding inquiry on 06.11.1981, 13.02.1982 and 30.02.1982 but respondent did not give any response whatsoever. 8. With regard to criminal cases, Income Tax Department communicated progress vide letters dated 04.05.1982, 01.04.1982 and 18.05.1982. 9. In the letter dated 18.05.19682 Income Tax Department informed that trial of criminal case against respondent may take 2 to 3 years. Income Tax Department also vide letter dated 29.01.1986 suggested to proceed with enquiry without waiting for result of criminal matter pending in the Court. 10. DC examined the matter and found that contents of criminal case and subject matter of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ficer (Retd.), Agra and Major H.S.Sawhney (Retd.) were recorded in presence of respondent. 16. For the purpose of inspection of originally deposited challans available with Income Tax Department and/or Court, D.C. adjourned enquiry proceedings. 17. On 29.12.1988 when DC met in furtherence of enquiry, one of Members of DC had changed and therefore, respondent was given an option under Regulation 11(5) to request for de-novo enquiry or to continue from the stage it was left at the last hearing. Respondent opted to continue enquiry from the stage of last hearing. On 21/22.02.1989 when enquiry was fixed at Agra, respondent did not appear before DC and instead handed over a closed envelope, addressed to Secretary and left a message that he would appear before DC only after decision on the alleged contents in the envelope given by him. Envelop contains a copy of telegram dated 19.02.1989 sent by respondent to ICAI, requesting for adjournment and to take a decision on his earlier letter dated 11.02.1989. DC observed that in the letter dated 11.02.1989, respondent requested for supply of copy of certain documents produced by Income Tax Department and to hold enquiry de novo, in view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment, but only Re.1/- and ₹ 4/- being the last digit of these two payments were deposited in the Bank. These counterfoils were produced before the Committee. The said bills are made by the Respondent himself in his own handwriting. The Respondent when confronted with the evidence, has not been able to explain in what circumstances, he has made the bills and claimed re-imbursement and received the partial money. 38. The Committee has also carefully perused written statement and the statement of the Respondent at the hearing held on 29th December, 1988. The Respondent has thereafter chosen to absent himself and decided not to present himself at the last meeting fixed by the Committee in the wake of the evidence. The Respondent has continued to maintain that he was not responsible for depositing any amount in respect of these parties and has also been pleading that the Department having filed FIR, it would be appropriate to wait for the decision in the case of prosecution lodged by the Police. 39. As already stated, in view of the positive evidence wherein the Respondent claimed the re-imbursement of payment from United Pulverisers and the payment's vouchers of M/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the Council's meeting held from 5th to 7th August, 1993 and respondent may avail opportunity of hearing on 06.08.1993. Respondent appeared before Council on 06.08.1993 and stated that his counsel was out of Delhi and in his absence, it was not possible for him to proceed with the case and again requested for adjournment. He was informed that the matter had already been adjourned thrice and now it is not possible. However, on the persistent request on behalf of respondent, it was again adjourned so as to be considered in next meeting, whenever it would be held at Delhi. Vide letter dated 21.10.1993, respondent was informed that the report would be considered in the meeting scheduled to be held from 24th to 26th November, 1993. Respondent again regretted his inability to appear on account of death of his mother and sought adjournment. Request was accepted and matter was deferred to next meeting scheduled from 14th to 16th July, 1994. Respondent was informed by ICAI, vide letter dated 22.06.1994, asking him to appear on 15.07.1994. Respondent again sought adjournment vide letter dated 06.07.1994 on the ground that he had suffered cardiac pain and has been advised bed rest. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C or Council. Various dates on which proceedings were scheduled, and the manner in which respondent has sought accommodation, makes it clear that there was well planned attempt on the part of respondent to delay proceedings, as far as possible, and that is how, enquiry which commenced in 1980, took almost 14 years. DC took about four years in submission of report and, thereafter, before Council also, repeated adjournments were sought, which were allowed by Council so that respondent may not have any impression of injustice. In this process also, it took four years before Council. Thereafter, Council itself has taken almost five years in making Reference to this Court and it has been received in the year 1999. 23. Respondent did not examine any witness in his defence nor made any attempt in this regard. It allowed DC to proceed ex-parte, while on the contrary, several witnesses were examined in his presence also, who supported facts constituting information against respondent. Documentary evidence examined by Council clearly shows manipulations which were also admitted by respondent, as is evident from the findings recorded by DC in para 30 of its report, which may be reproduced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
