2024 Supreme(SC) 502
B. V. NAGARATHNA, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
Shaji Poulose – Appellant
Versus
Institute of Chartered Accountants of India – Respondent
Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s):Mr. Ashwin Kumar D.S., Adv. Ms. Aditi Anil Dani, Adv. Mr. Rangasaran Mohan, Adv. Ms. Surbhi Mehta, AOR Mr. Ishan Roy Chowdhury, Adv. Mr. Tapesh Kumar Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sukant Vikram, AOR Mr. Prashant Bharadwaj, Adv. Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Pai Amit, AOR Ms. Pankhuri Bhardwaj, Adv. Mr. Abhiyudaya Vats, Adv. Mr. Nikhil Pahwa, Adv. Ms. Vanshika Dubey, Adv. Mr. Kushal Dube, Adv. Mr. Tathagata Dutta, Adv. Mr. P. Ashok, Adv. Ms. Lochana S. Babu, Adv. Petitioner-in-person Mr. Smarhar Singh, AOR Mr. Jai Krishna Singh, Adv. Ms. Shweta Kumari, Adv. Mr. Manish K. Bishnoi, AOR Mr. Narinder K Verma, Adv. Ms. Ila Shikhar Sheel, Adv. Mr. Nirmal Prasad, Adv. Mr. Khubaib Shakeel, Adv. Ms. Pallavi Singh, Adv. Ms. Pallavii Singh, Adv. Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR Mr. Shobhit Jain, Adv. Mr. Aakash Nandolia, Adv. Ms. Sagun Srivastava, Adv. Ms. Kriti Gupta, Adv. Mr. Preetesh Kapur, Sr. Adv. Ms. Ashmita Bisarya, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Dutt, Adv. Mr. Nirmal Kumar Ambastha, AOR Mr. Renjith B. Marar, Adv. Ms. Lakshmi N. Kaimal, AOR Mr. Rajkumar Pavothil, Adv. Mr. Arun Poomulli, Adv. Mr. Keshavraj Nair, Adv. Mr. Avinash Krishnakumar, Adv. Mr. Harsh Vardhan Shah Shyam, Adv. By Courts Motion, AOR Mr. E. M. S. Anam, AOR Mr. Anas Tanwir, AOR Mr. Ebad Ur Rahman, Adv. Mr. Md. Asif Abbas, Adv. Ms. Masoom Rajsingh, Adv. Mr. Tanay Hegde, Adv. Mr. Parijat Kishore, AOR Mr. Beno Bencigar, Adv. Mr. Sanyat Lodha, AOR Mr. Vishnu Mohan, Adv. Mr. Ravi Raghunath, AOR Mr. Goutham Shivshankar, AOR Mr. B.Ramana Kumar, Adv. Mr. B Ramanakumar, Adv. Mr. K. Paari Vendhan, AOR Mr. Raghunatha Sethupathy B, Adv. Mr. Ragunatha Sethupathy.b, Adv. Ms. Ramya, Adv. Ms. Ramya A., Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pramod Dayal, AOR Mr. Nikunj Dayal, Adv. Mr. K M Natraj, A.S.G. Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Adv. Mr. Bhuvan Mishra, Adv. Mr. Shivank Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Prahlad Singh, Adv. Mr. Shashank Bajpai, Adv. Mr. Vatsal Joshi, Adv. Mr. Ashok Panigrahi, Adv. Mr. Swayam Prabhu Das, Adv. Mr. Diwakar Sharma, Adv. Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR Mr. Wills Mathews, Adv. Mr. Dhanesh M Nair, Adv. Mr. Paul John Edison, Adv. Mr. Devendra Kumar Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Garg, Adv. Mr. Ashish Gopal Garg, Adv. Ms. Shweta Garg, AOR
Table of Contents |
S. No. | Particulars |
01 | Bird’s Eye View of the Controversy |
02 | Historical Perspective |
03 | Submissions |
04 | Submissions of the Petitioners |
05 | Submission of the Respondents |
06 | Points for Consideration |
07 | Legal Framework |
08 | Discussion |
09 | Re: Point No. 1: Whether the Council of the respondent-Institute, under the 1949 Act, was competent to impose, by way of Guidelines, a numerical restriction on the maximum number of tax audits that could be accepted by a Chartered Accountant, under Section 44AB of the 1961 Act, in a Financial Year by way of a Guideline? |
10 | Re: Point No. 2: Whether the restrictions imposed are unreasonable and therefore, violative of the right guaranteed to Chartered Accountants under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution? |
11 | Re: Point No. 3: Whether the restrictions imposed are arbitrary and illegal and therefore, impermissible under Article 14 of the Constitution? |
12 | Re: Point No. 4: Whether exceeding such specified number of tax audits can be deemed to be ‘professional misconduct’? |
13 | Conclusion |
1. The petitioners herein are Chartered Accountants who have challenged the validity of Clause 6 of Guidelines No. 1-CA(7)/02/2008 dated 08.08.2008 issued by the Institute of Chartered Accoun
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
