Facts of the Matter

  1. NFRA had passed:
    • Order No. 63 dated 05.12.2023 in the matter of CA Jignesh Mehta.
    • Order No. 64 dated 05.12.2023 in the matter of CA Amit Vinay Chaturvedi.
  2. After publication of the orders on the NFRA website, certain textual corrections were found necessary.
  3. NFRA therefore issued an Errata on 13.12.2023 to amend specific portions of the orders.
  4. The correction related to the phrase appearing in:
    • Paragraph 30 of Order No. 63.
    • Paragraph 20 of Order No. 64.
  5. The corrected wording clarifies that the observations made in the orders are “not creating any new offence.”

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the language used in the original disciplinary orders could create ambiguity regarding the creation of a new offence.
  2. Whether clarification was required to ensure that the orders remained within the statutory framework prescribed under the Companies Act, 2013 and the NFRA Rules, 2018.
  3. Whether the findings recorded by NFRA merely interpret and apply existing legal provisions rather than create any new legal offence.

 

Petitioner’s Arguments

Not applicable.

The document is an administrative Errata issued by NFRA and does not record adversarial pleadings or specific petitioner submissions.

 

Respondent’s Arguments

Not applicable.

The Errata document does not contain respondent submissions or objections.

 

Court / Authority Findings

NFRA clarified that the relevant sentences in the disciplinary orders should be read as:

“is not creating any new offence”

The correction was introduced to remove ambiguity and ensure accurate interpretation of the original orders.

The authority thereby clarified that the disciplinary findings were based on existing statutory provisions and were not intended to create any new category of offence.

 

Court Order / Final Direction

NFRA directed that:

  • The phrase appearing in the last line of Paragraph 30 of Order No. 63 shall be read as:

“is not creating any new offence.”

  • The phrase appearing in the last line of Paragraph 20 of Order No. 64 shall be read as:

“is not creating any new offence.”

The Errata stands authorized and issued by the National Financial Reporting Authority.

 

Important Clarification

The Errata does not alter the substantive findings of the disciplinary orders.

Its purpose is limited to clarifying that:

  • NFRA's interpretation of the law does not amount to creation of a fresh offence.
  • Existing statutory provisions continue to govern professional misconduct and disciplinary proceedings.
  • The correction is explanatory and clarificatory in nature.

 

Statutory Provisions Involved

Companies Act, 2013

  • Section 132(4)
  • Section 132(4) read with NFRA Rules

National Financial Reporting Authority Rules, 2018

  • Rule 11(6)

Link to download the order -https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s3e2ad76f2326fbc6b56a45a56c59fafdb/uploads/2023/12/202312142005445600.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.