TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1163X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uct of the Respondent No.1-Chartered Accountant was derogatory in nature - guilty of ‘Other Misconduct’ under Section 22 read with Section 21 of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949. Held that:- The Disciplinary Committee has, on facts, found the Chartered Accountant guilty of a practice which was not in the Chartered Accountant’s professional capacity - Thus, it was entitled to do under Schedul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aint dated 16.03.2005 against Gurvinder Singh - Respondent No.1, who is a Chartered Accountant, relating to sale of 100 shares in 1999, which were transferred to the Chartered Accountant s own name. 3) What has been pleaded before us is that the matter has ultimately been settled between the Complainant and the Chartered Accountant, despite which the Disciplinary Committee took up the case and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eld by him the respondent was not acting as a Chartered Accountant. He was not discharging any function in relation to his practice as a Chartered Accountant. 15. The Reference is accordingly answered by declaring the law as above and not inflicting any penalty upon the respondent. 5) We are afraid that the High Court has not correctly appreciated Section 21(3) of the Chartered Accountan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... punishable with imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months; (2) in the opinion of the Council, brings disrepute to the profession or the Institute as a result of his action whether or not related to his professional work. 6) The Disciplinary Committee has, on facts, found the Chartered Accountant guilty of a practice which was not in the Chartered Accountant s professional capacit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
