Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2021 (5) TMI 531

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... DGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL) 1. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing. 2. Petitioner impugns order dated 16.12.2020 passed by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India dismissing the complaint filed by the petitioner against respondent No. 3. 3. The case set up by the petitioner is that respondent No. 3 has committed professional misconduct and submitted incorrect reports after scrutiny of the books and papers of the certain companies. 4. A petition for merger was filed by M/s Napean Trading and Investment Company Private Limited, M/s Regal Trading and Investment Company Private Limited, M/s Vidhya Trading and Investment Company Private Limited and M/s Harsham Investment and Trading Company Private Limited. Th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nataka and that the reports prepared by him were placed before and considered by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka. Accordingly, the Committee was of the view that the said report of the auditor was the property of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka which alone could pass any order on the same. It also noticed that the matter was sub judice and the Committee had no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the same. It is only the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka which can take a view on the Report of the Respondent. The Committee can take any action in the matter only if an order to this effect is passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka and its continuing with an inquiry in the present complaint would not be appropriate. Accordingly, the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he list of such cases. Said list is as under:- SI.No. Case Details Date of Order Bench Costs 1. Wholesale Trading Services Pvt. Ltd. v. UOI; WP(C) 5602/2017 07.07.2017 Division bench of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court Rs. 10,000/- Imposed as costs on the Appellant 2. Wholesale Trading Services Pvt. Ltd. v. UOI; WP(C) 10536/2017 04.12.2017   Hon'ble Delhi High Court Rs. 10,000/- Payable to Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee within a period of three weeks, imposed on the Appellant. 3. Wholesale Trading Services Pvt. Ltd. v. ICAI & Ors; WP(C) 8071/2019 04.12.2017 Hon'ble Delhi High Court Rs. 10,000/- Payable to Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee within a period of two weeks, imposed on the Appellan .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... It is submitted that one of the grounds taken in the said application seeking recall of the order of merger was the same as taken in the complaint against respondent No.3 i.e., challenge to the reports submitted by respondent No. 3 before the Karnataka High Court. 20. The recall application has been dismissed by the Karnataka High Court by its order dated 17.03.2021 holding that applicant was not a party to the main petition and did not has the locus standi to file the application. 21. Said order records that applicant was not an aggrieved party as was neither a shareholder nor a director or any other person who is connected to or has a nexus with the parties to the proceedings or the impugned order. The order also records that the applic .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nted by the Karnataka High Court and reports were submitted to it for the purposes of sanction of merger, it is only the Karnataka High Court which could comment upon the reports and only if any order to the said effect was passed by the High Court of Karnataka, any inquiry could be conducted by the Disciplinary Committee. 27. What the petitioner and his advocate, Mr. R. Subramanian are seeking to do is to start parallel proceedings to challenge the sanction of merger by Karnataka High Court. As noticed by the Karnataka High Court as also admitted by the petitioner and Mr. R. Subramanian that the petitioner or Mr. R. Subramanian are neither shareholders, nor directors or any person connected or having a nexus to the parties to the scheme o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates