Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
 
Tally On Cloud Tally on Cloud: Ready for the Daily Backup Requirement
Keep your Tally books accessible from anywhere while supporting your Rule 46(8) obligations. With daily backups configured on servers physically located in India, Tally on Cloud helps you maintain the backup arrangement required for electronic books of account under the Income-tax Rules, 2026. Move your Tally to the cloud with confidence.
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
« Top Headlines »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Mock Test Papers Series - I & II for Students appearing in CA Foundation January 2027 Examination.
 Income Tax Rules 2026: CBDT Introduces Revised Form 161 for Penalty Waiver, Clarifies Misreporting Categories and Taxpayer Relief
 ITR Filing and Income Tax Audit Deadline Extended: 5 Critical Things Taxpayers Must Know
 Filing Belated ITR for AY 2026-27? Know Which Losses You Can Carry Forward and Which You May Lose
 CBDT Extends Tax Audit Report Deadline to October 21, ITR Filing Last Date to November 21 for AY 2026-27
 CBDT Extends AY 2026-27 ITR Filing Deadline for Tax-Audit Cases: New Dates and Key Compliance Details
 Foreign Assets Missing From Your ITR? Income Tax Department Opens One-Time Disclosure Window
 Tax Audit Deadline September 30: Why AIS, TDS and GST Figures May Not Match Your ITR and What Taxpayers Should Do
 Tax audit deadline September 30: Common mistakes taxpayers should avoid
 Your ITR says ‘verified’, but the refund hasn’t arrived? 5 reasons why your money could be stuck
 Missed the ITR Deadline but TDS Refund Is Due? Here’s How You Can Still Claim Your Money

ICAI to give fair hearing to PwC officials asked by HC
April, 17th 2009

The Bombay High Court on Thursday ordered the disciplinary committee of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) to provide a fair hearing to Partha Ghosh, a Price Waterhouse (PWC) partner and a senior manager, DVP Rao, in connection with a case of alleged professional misconduct.

The duo, both chartered accountants, had audited the accounts of Global Trust Bank in 2003. ICAI had, based on news reports, alleged that the external auditors had approved suspect accounts and data in RBIs annual financial inspection (AFI) report, ordered that an inquiry be conducted by the disciplinary committee for alleged professional misconduct.

We have no hesitation in holding that the disciplinary committee has failed to act in conformity with the provision... and settled cannons of natural justice and fair play, division bench of chief justice Swatanter Kumar and justice SC Dharmadhikari observed. The court also held that Mr Ghosh and Mr Rao had not been given a fair deal and their rights stand violated.

Mr Ghosh and Mr Rao contended that there was significant divergence in the report of the special auditor M Bhaskar Rao, appointed by RBI for the financial year ending March 31, 2002, and the 2002 AFI report. RBI had recommended additional provision to the extent of Rs 596.3 crore, while according to the special auditor, the provision was only for Rs 373.43 crore.

For the year ending March 31, 2003, the non-performing assets were shown in the notes at Rs 915.8 crore and accounts were qualified to the extent of Rs 311.61 crore, they added.

However, in AFI 2003 report, RBI had recommended provisioning requirements far in excess of those contained in the report of the special auditor as well as those contained in the accounts for March 31, 2003, which had been audited by Mr Ghosh and Mr Rao. When the inquiry was being conducted by the disciplinary committee, in October, last year, the petitioners sought to cross-examine RBIs witnesses who had knowledge of the facts stated in the chargesheet against them.

But the officer did not attend the hearing and no documents were submitted. Also, attempts were made to deviate from the set procedure, the PwC officials alleged.

In March this year, the members of the committee were changed and the new members did not clarify the procedure to be adopted. The order rejecting their application seeking adjournment was also not provided to Mr Ghosh and Mr Rao.

The court held that a copy of the order be provided to the petitioners and until the directions are complied with, the committee should not submit its report to the Council of ICAI.

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2026 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting