D<\/span><\/strong>et<\/span><\/strong>ails <\/span>of <\/span>Pr<\/span>o<\/span>cee<\/span>din<\/span>gs
\nIn<\/span>itiated &
\nC<\/span>ondu<\/span>ct<\/span>ed against e<\/span>ach
\nind<\/span>ivi<\/span>du<\/span>al
\n<\/span>Mem<\/span>ber<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n

\n S<\/strong>L<\/strong>.<\/strong> No.<\/strong><\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n	\n N<\/strong>a<\/strong>m<\/strong>e<\/strong>of<\/strong>th<\/strong>e<\/strong>Ch<\/span><\/strong>art<\/span>e<\/span>re<\/span>d<\/strong>A<\/strong>cc<\/span>oun<\/span>tants<\/strong> (R<\/span>e<\/span>sp<\/span>ondents)<\/strong><\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n	\n A<\/strong>ct<\/strong>ion<\/strong>         t<\/strong>aken<\/strong>         b<\/strong>y<\/strong>        the<\/strong> Discipl<\/span>in<\/span>ary<\/strong>               C<\/span>o<\/span>mmi<\/span>tt<\/span>e<\/span>e,<\/strong> App<\/span>ellate<\/strong> <\/span>Au<\/span>thority<\/strong> <\/span>a<\/span>nd<\/strong> <\/span>status<\/strong> of<\/strong> <\/span>the<\/strong> matter<\/span>.<\/strong><\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n 1<\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n	\n CA<\/strong>.<\/strong>      S.<\/strong>     G<\/span>opalak<\/span>rishn<\/span>an<\/span>,<\/strong>       Statutor<\/span>y<\/strong> \n Aud<\/span>itor<\/strong><\/p>\n (S<\/strong>ign<\/span>in<\/span>g<\/strong>p<\/strong>artner<\/strong>f<\/strong>or<\/strong>th<\/span><\/strong>e<\/strong>p<\/strong>er<\/span>iod<\/strong>1.4.2000<\/strong> to<\/strong> 31.3.2007)<\/strong><\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n	\n 1. <\/span>The <\/span>Com<\/span>mi<\/span>tt<\/span>ee <\/span>vi<\/span>de <\/span>i<\/span>ts <\/span>Report \n date<\/span>d23rdJanua<\/span>r<\/span>y<\/span>, <\/span>20<\/span>12 <\/span>found the        Respondent           g<\/span>u<\/span>ilt<\/span>y   of prof<\/span>e<\/span>ssional           misconduct     <\/span>unde<\/span>r \n Cl<\/span>ause<\/span>s <\/span>(5), <\/span>(6)<\/span>, <\/span>(7) <\/span>(8<\/span>) <\/span>a<\/span>nd <\/span>(9) <\/span>of \n Part <\/span>I <\/span>of <\/span>Se<\/span>cond <\/span>Sche<\/span>d<\/span>ule <\/span>t<\/span>o <\/span>the \n Chartered <\/span>Ac<\/span>counta<\/span>nts <\/span>Act, <\/span>1949. \n The <\/span>Commi<\/span>tt<\/span>ee <\/span>fix<\/span>ed <\/span>t<\/span>he <\/span>hearing \n for <\/span>awar<\/span>d <\/span>of <\/span>puni<\/span>shm<\/span>en<\/span>t <\/span>on <\/span>22nd Apr<\/span>il, 2012.<\/p>\n The <\/span>Com<\/span>mi<\/span>tt<\/span>ee <\/span>vi<\/span>de <\/span>it<\/span>s <\/span>order \n date<\/span>d11th <\/span>May, \n <\/span>2012, <\/span>awar<\/span>d<\/span>ed \n the <\/span>punishment <\/span>for <\/span>remo<\/span>val <\/span>of <\/span>the name     fr<\/span>om     the    Register     of \n Membe<\/span>rs <\/span>perma<\/span>n<\/span>entl<\/span>y <\/span>and <\/span>also imposed <\/span>a <\/span>fine <\/span>of <\/span>R<\/span>s. <\/span>5 <\/span>lac \n <\/span>on him.<\/p>\n 2.     The     Appe<\/span>llate      Authorit<\/span>y upheld     <\/span>the    dec<\/span>ision     <\/span>of     the Disciplinar<\/span>y <\/span>Comm<\/span>it<\/span>tee<\/span>.<\/p>\n 3.There<\/span>after<\/span>, <\/span>t<\/span>he <\/span>Re<\/span>spondent appr<\/span>oa<\/span>ch<\/span>ed <\/span>the <\/span>Hon<\/span>\u201dbl<\/span>e <\/span>Hig<\/span>h \n Courtaga<\/span>inst <\/span>t<\/span>he <\/span>orde<\/span>r <\/span>of <\/span>t<\/span>he Disciplinary <\/span>Com<\/span>mi<\/span>tt<\/span>ee<\/span>.      Si<\/span>nce<\/span>, \n ther<\/span>e <\/span>was <\/span>no <\/span>st<\/span>a<\/span>y <\/span>and <\/span>th<\/span>e <\/span>Instit<\/span>ute \n has \n <\/span>publ<\/span>ished <\/span>t<\/span>he <\/span>Noti<\/span>fica<\/span>tion <\/span>for re<\/span>move<\/span>d <\/span>o<\/span>f <\/span>hi<\/span>s <\/span>n<\/span>ame <\/span>p<\/span>er<\/span>mane<\/span>ntl<\/span>y \n fr<\/span>om \n the Re<\/span>gister <\/span>of Mem<\/span>bers.<\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n 2.<\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n	\n CA<\/strong>.<\/strong> S.<\/strong> Tallu<\/span>ri,<\/strong> \n S<\/span>tatutor<\/span>y<\/strong> Aud<\/span>itor<\/strong><\/p>\n  <\/p>\n (S<\/strong>ign<\/span>in<\/span>g<\/strong>p<\/strong>artner<\/strong>f<\/strong>or<\/strong>th<\/span><\/strong>e<\/strong>p<\/strong>er<\/span>iod<\/strong>1.4.2007<\/strong> to<\/strong> 30.9.2008<\/strong><\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n	\n The <\/span>C<\/span>om<\/span>mit<\/span>tee <\/span>vi<\/span>de <\/span>it<\/span>s <\/span>Report \n date<\/span>d1stFebr<\/span>uar<\/span>y<\/span>, <\/span>2013 <\/span>found t<\/span>he Respondent <\/span>g<\/span>uilt<\/span>y <\/span>of <\/span>p<\/span>rofessional \n mis<\/span>conduc<\/span>t <\/span>under <\/span>Cl<\/span>ause<\/span>s <\/span>(5), (6)<\/span>, <\/span>(7) <\/span>(8<\/span>) <\/span>and <\/span>(9) <\/span>o<\/span>f <\/span>Part <\/span>I <\/span>of Second <\/span>S<\/span>che<\/span>dule \n <\/span>to <\/span>the <\/span>C<\/span>hartere<\/span>d \n Acc<\/span>ountants Act, 1949.The <\/span>Com<\/span>mi<\/span>tt<\/span>ee <\/span>vi<\/span>de <\/span>it<\/span>s <\/span>order date<\/span>d <\/span>21st <\/span>Octobe<\/span>r, <\/span>2013 <\/span>awa<\/span>rde<\/span>d \n the <\/span>punishment <\/span>for <\/span>remo<\/span>val <\/span>of <\/span>the name  fr<\/span>om     the       Register of<\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n \n\n\n\n\n \n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n Members permanently and also \n imposed a fine of Rs.5 lac on him.<\/p>\n  <\/p>\n 2.The Respondent has filed an Appeal     before     the    Appellate Authority against the order of the \n Disciplinary Committee and the same is yet to be decided by the \n Appellate \n Authority.<\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 3.<\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n CA<\/strong>.<\/strong>P<\/strong>u<\/strong>l<\/strong>avarthi<\/strong>S<\/strong>i<\/strong>va<\/strong> Prasad<\/strong><\/p>\n (Aud<\/strong>i<\/strong>t<\/strong>In<\/strong>charge<\/strong>f<\/strong>or<\/strong>th<\/strong>e<\/strong>p<\/strong>eriod<\/strong>1.4.2001<\/strong>–<\/strong>31.3.2005)<\/strong><\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n The Committee vide its Report dated 6th October,2010 found the \n Respondent guilty of professional \n misconduct under Clause(1)of Part II of Second Schedule and \n Clause(7) of Part I of Second Schedule      to      the      Chartered \n Accountants Act, 1949.<\/p>\n The Committee vide its order \n dated     5th       December,       2011, awarded     the    \n  punishment     for removal of the name from the Register of Members permanently and also imposed a fine of Rs.5 lac on him.<\/p>\n 2.The Appellate Authority vide \n its Order dated 5th     September, 2012 upheld the orders passed by the Disciplinary Committee.<\/p>\n 3.The Respondents have now filed Writ Petition against the \n Orders of Appellate Authority and the      Disciplinary        Committee \n before the Hon\u2019ble High Court of \n Delhi.     \n  TheHon\u2019bleCourton \n considerationofthematter,has \n grantedstaytotheRespondenton the       undertaking       from  the Respondentthathewouldnot practiceasCharteredAccountants tillthetimefinalordersare passed \n bythe High \n Court.<\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n \n\n\n\n\n \n 4<\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n CA<\/strong>.<\/strong> Chintapatla<\/strong> Ravindernath<\/strong><\/p>\n (Aud<\/strong>i<\/strong>t<\/strong>In<\/strong>charge<\/strong>f<\/strong>or<\/strong>th<\/strong>e<\/strong>p<\/strong>eriod<\/strong>1.4.2005<\/strong> \u2013<\/strong> 30.9.2008)<\/strong><\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n The Committee videits Report dated 6th October,2010 found the \n Respondent guilty of professional \n misconduct under Clause(1)of Part II of Second Schedule and \n Clause(7) of PartI of Second Schedule      to      the      Chartered \n Accountants Act, 1949.<\/p>\n The Committee vide its order \n dated     5th       December,       2011, awarded     the    \n  punishment     for removal of the name from the Register of Members permanently and also imposed a fine of Rs.5 lac on him.<\/p>\n 2.The Appellate Authority vide \n its Order dated 5th     September, 2012 upheld the orders passed by the Disciplinary Committee.<\/p>\n 3.The Respondents have now filed Writ Petition against the \n Orders of Appellate Authority and the      Disciplinary        Committee \n before the Hon\u2019ble High Court of \n Delhi. The Hon\u2019ble Court on \n consideration of the matter,has \n granted stay to the Respondenton the       undertaking       from  the Respondent that he would not practice as Chartered Accountants till the time final orders are passed \n by the High \n Court.<\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 5<\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n Sh<\/strong>ri<\/strong> V.<\/strong> S.<\/strong> Prabhakara<\/strong> Gupta<\/strong>(then<\/strong> Head<\/strong> \n of<\/strong>Internal<\/strong> \n A<\/strong>udit<\/strong> \n Cell)<\/strong><\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n The Committee vide its Report dated 8th February,2012 found \n the      Respondent      guilty      of professional      misconduct     under \n Clauses(7)(8)and(9) of Part I \n and Clause(1)of Part II of Second     Schedule     and    \n  Other \n Misconduct falling with in the meaning of Clause(2) of Part IV of First Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949.<\/p>\n The Committee vide its order \n dated 11th May,2012,awarded<\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n\n \n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n the punishment for removal of the \n name     from     the    Register     of \n Members permanently and also imposed a fine of Rs.5 lac on him.(It is to mention that the \n name of the Respondent stands removed on account of non-payment of membership fees by \n the Respondent)<\/p>\n 2.The Appellate Authority vide \n its order dated 23rd     December, 2013 upheld the decision of the Disciplinary Committee.<\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n 6<\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n V<\/strong>.<\/strong> Srinivasu<\/strong><\/p>\n (th<\/strong>en<\/strong> \n CFO<\/strong> of<\/strong>the<\/strong> \n Company)<\/strong><\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n \n The Committee vide its Report dated 3rd January,2012 found the \n Respondent guilty of professional \n misconduct under Clause(1)of PartII of Second Schedule and \n Clause(7) of Part I of Second Schedule and Other Misconduct \n falling within the meaning of \n Clause(2) of PartIV of First \n Schedule      to      the      Chartered \n Accountants Act, 1949.<\/p>\n The Committee vide its order \n dated 23rd January,2012,awarded \n the punishment for removal of the name     from     the    Register     of \n Members permanently and also imposed a fine of Rs.5 lacon him.<\/p>\n 2.The Appellate Authority vide \n its Order dated 5th     September, 2012 upheld the decision of the Disciplinary Committee.<\/p>\n 3.The name of the Respondent \n has       been       removed       w.e.f. 08.05.2012.<\/p>\n  <\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n  <\/p>\n <\/strong><\/em><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" As part of ICAI\u2019s continuous drive to uphold the credibility, integrity and image of the accountancy profession in India, the regulatory mechanism of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) is working assiduously. ICAI has been taking disciplinary action against its errant members as per the provisions of the Chartered Accountants (Amendment) Act, 2006 … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_uag_custom_page_level_css":"","_mi_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[11],"tags":[148],"class_list":["post-766","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-miscellaneous","tag-icai"],"yoast_head":"\n