TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 43X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t appointment of any statutory auditor would be illegal. In the same breath, the petitioner also stated that it is not known who the present auditor of TIL is, as respondent no. 6 (Manu Sharma) had allegedly disclaimed that he was appointed as an auditor of TIL. Thus, the petitioner was fully aware that another auditor was to be appointed by TIL at the AGM to be held on 30.09.2011. Whether KNA or its constituent partner, CA Alok Shukla, was guilty of professional misconduct on account of not obtaining a NOC from the petitioner? - HELD THAT:- The Board held that KNA was not guilty of any professional misconduct as alleged, as the petitioner was not the previous auditor with which KNA was required to communicate before accepting the assign ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tor to correspond with the previous auditor. It is also material to note that the petitioner is not associated with TIL as an auditor since 2008. The present petition is dismissed with costs quantified at ₹25,000/-. - W.P.(C) 7674/2019 And CM No. 31881/2019 - - - Dated:- 22-7-2019 - MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU For The Petitioner : Mr Siddharth Garg, Advocate For The Respondents : None ORDER VIBHU BAKHRU, J 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning an order dated 02.02.2019 (hereafter the impugned order ) passed by the Board of Discipline of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (hereafter ICAI ). By the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. It is also clear that the claim made by the petitioner that it continued to be the statutory auditor of TIL, is incorrect. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was pointedly asked whether the petitioner had any letter of appointment, appointing the petitioner as an auditor to audit the accounts of TIL for the financial year ending 31.03.2008 and thereafter; or a copy of the resolution appointing the petitioner as such. His response was in the negative. 5. It is also settled law that an auditor holds its office till the next Annual General Body Meeting of the company. In the present case, the time for holding the Annual General Body Meeting for the year ending 31.03.2007 had lapsed on 30.09.2007. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iting the accounts for the financial year 2009-2010. It appears that on becoming aware that TIL was proposing to pass a resolution to appoint another auditor (KNA), the petitioner sent a letter dated 13.09.2011 to TIL, asserting that the petitioner continued to hold office as an auditor and alleging that appointment of any statutory auditor would be illegal. In the same breath, the petitioner also stated that it is not known who the present auditor of TIL is, as respondent no. 6 (Manu Sharma) had allegedly disclaimed that he was appointed as an auditor of TIL. Thus, the petitioner was fully aware that another auditor was to be appointed by TIL at the AGM to be held on 30.09.2011. 11. The petitioner has also placed on record ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a statutory auditor and had further requested M/s Manu Sharma and Co. to inform it if there was any objection, professional or otherwise, to them accepting the appointment. KNA had also stated that they did not elicit any response from the petitioner, since the petitioner was not the previous auditor considering that the accounts for the three years ending 31.03.2007 to 31.03.2009 had been audited by M/s Manu Sharma and Co. In order to further ascertain whether M/s Manu Sharma and Co. were the previous auditors, KNA had examined the books of accounts of TIL and had noticed that the audit fees had been paid to M/s Manu Sharma and Co. KNA also pointed out that there were various disputes pending between Sh. Sanjeev Bindal, one of the constitu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 is produced hereunder: A chartered accountant in practise shall be deemed to be guilty of professional misconduct, if he- * * * ( 8) accepts a position as auditor previously held by another chartered accountant or certified auditor who has been issued certificate under the Restricted Certificate Rules, 1932 without first communicating with him in writing; 18. In the present case, the accounts filed with the Registrar of Companies for the yea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
