Facts of the
Case
The complainant, CA T. T. Durairaj Kandiar, on
behalf of M/s Durairaj & Associates, was appointed as the statutory auditor
of M/s Karthigeya Plastics & Technologies Private Limited for the financial
year 2019–20 and completed the audit for that year. The audited financial
statements disclosed audit fees payable of ₹12,20,611 as on 31.03.2020, which
remained unpaid. Due to continued non-payment, the complainant firm informed
the company in January 2022 that audit services would resume only upon part
payment of fees.
In April 2022, the complainant firm noticed that
the company had filed its financial statements for FY 2020–21 in XBRL format
with Form AOC-4 on the MCA portal, wherein CA Anand K. was shown as the statutory
auditor. The AOC-4 reflected an illogical SRN “Z99999999” against Form ADT-1,
indicating appointment of the respondent as auditor on 27.11.2021 without
resignation or removal of the complainant firm, which continued to hold office
for a five-year term from 01.04.2019 to 31.03.2024.
Issues
Involved
Whether the respondent Chartered Accountant was
guilty of professional misconduct under Item (8) of Part I of the First
Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 for accepting statutory audit
of the company for FY 2020–21 without first communicating in writing with the
existing statutory auditor.
Petitioner’s
Arguments
The complainant contended that the respondent
accepted the audit assignment without any prior written communication as
mandated under Item (8) of Part I. It was submitted that the complainant firm
had neither resigned nor been removed and continued to be the statutory auditor
for a valid term. The complainant also pointed out irregularities in the AOC-4
filing, including an illogical SRN for ADT-1, which indicated improper
appointment of the respondent.
Respondent’s
Arguments
The respondent did not appear before the Board
during final hearing and did not submit written submissions on the complaint.
However, in response to a communication from the Disciplinary Directorate under
Rule 8(5), the respondent tendered an unconditional apology, admitting that he
did not communicate with the previous auditor before accepting the assignment.
The respondent clarified that he had not filed Form AOC-4 nor certified the
same for FY 2020–21.
Court Order
/ Findings
The Board of Discipline examined the material on
record, the Prima Facie Opinion of the Director (Discipline), and the
respondent’s admission. The Board noted that the respondent had clearly admitted
failure to comply with the mandatory requirement of prior written communication
with the existing auditor before accepting the audit assignment. The Board
further observed that the complainant firm was validly appointed as statutory
auditor for a five-year term and had neither resigned nor been removed when the
respondent was appointed.
The Board held that the absence of any evidence of
prior communication, coupled with the respondent’s admission, conclusively
established violation of Item (8) of Part I of the First Schedule. Other issues
relating to outstanding audit fees and AOC-4 filing were held not to affect the
core finding of misconduct.
Important
Clarification
The Board clarified that prior written
communication with the existing auditor before accepting an audit assignment is
a mandatory professional requirement. Admission of failure to comply with this
obligation is sufficient to attract professional misconduct under Item (8) of
Part I, irrespective of whether the respondent ultimately certified statutory
filings.
Final
Outcome
The Board of Discipline, ICAI, held that CA
Anand K. was GUILTY of Professional Misconduct under Item (8) of Part I of
the First Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949. In exercise of
powers under Section 21A(3), the Board imposed a fine of ₹25,000, by
order dated 25.09.2024, pursuant to its findings dated 27.08.2024.
Source Link - https://mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1768815947_CAT.T.DurairajKandiarvs.CAAnandK.BoardofDisciplineICAI.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment