News Details- (Get Professional Updates on Whatsapp, Msg on
8285393786) More
News
Chartered Accountant can be held liable for deficiency in service
PrintA Chartered Accountant (CA) who duped his client was dragged to the consumer court. In a significant ruling, the forum held that negligence in discharge of professional duties constitutes an unfair trade practice.
Fernandes received a summons from the income tax (I-T) department to appear at its Ballard Estate office. He engaged the services of Singh, a CA from Nalla Sopara, to appear before the IT officials. Singh also undertook to prepare his income tax returns to clear the dues.
Fernandes, who was under considerable mental stress and pressure, trusted Singh, and was ready to abide by his advice. Taking advantage, Singh informed Fernandes that the IT authorities had now started collecting tax online through the CA who prepared the returns. Under the guise of payment of tax, Singh collected money in three installments, all by cheque, totalling Rs 2,32,863. Singh pocketed the money and did not carry out the work, except prepare the returns for two years, which were also incorrect. Ultimately, Fernandes had to get the work done thorough another CA.
Fernandes filed a complaint before the South Mumbai Consumer Forum, alleging Singh had been negligent and indulging in unfair trade practice in the discharge of his professional duties. Fernandes sought a refund of the amount misappropriated by Singh. In his defence, Singh questioned the jurisdiction of the Forum, as he resided in Nallasopara in Thane District. Singh also claimed that the amount paid to him was not for depositing the tax payable, but towards his fees. To falsify this contention, Fernandes applied to the Forum to direct Singh to produce his own IT returns, which would reveal whether this amount had been disclosed as his fees. Singh, when ordered to produce his returns, appears to have panicked, has stopped appearing in order to avoid producing these.
The forum noted a part of the cause of action had arisen within its territorial jurisdiction, as Singh had been engaged to appear in the I-T proceedings at Ballard Estate in South Mumbai. So the Forum concluded that the complaint was maintainable before it.
On merits, the Forum observed, Singh had failed to show what work he had carried out, or how he had charged his fees. Singh had also failed to produce his own I-T returns to support his contentions. In contrast, Fernandes had substantiated his contention by producing the receipts issued by another Chartered Accountant who was subsequently engaged to carry out the entire work.
In its order of July 10, 2015, delivered by S M Ratnakar for the Bench along with S G Chabukswar, the forum indicted Singh of rendering deficient services and indulging in unfair trade practices. It ordered Singh to refund the entire amount of Rs 2,32,863, along with nine per cent annual interest from July 17, 2009, the date Fernandes demanded a refund. The Forum also directed Singh to pay compensation of Rs 5,000 for causing mental agony, and Rs 3,000 towards costs.
Any professional is expected to behave prudently. If he fails to do so, or acts in a reckless or negligent manner, he can be hauled up before a consumer forum. (Business Standard)
Fernandes received a summons from the income tax (I-T) department to appear at its Ballard Estate office. He engaged the services of Singh, a CA from Nalla Sopara, to appear before the IT officials. Singh also undertook to prepare his income tax returns to clear the dues.
Fernandes, who was under considerable mental stress and pressure, trusted Singh, and was ready to abide by his advice. Taking advantage, Singh informed Fernandes that the IT authorities had now started collecting tax online through the CA who prepared the returns. Under the guise of payment of tax, Singh collected money in three installments, all by cheque, totalling Rs 2,32,863. Singh pocketed the money and did not carry out the work, except prepare the returns for two years, which were also incorrect. Ultimately, Fernandes had to get the work done thorough another CA.
Fernandes filed a complaint before the South Mumbai Consumer Forum, alleging Singh had been negligent and indulging in unfair trade practice in the discharge of his professional duties. Fernandes sought a refund of the amount misappropriated by Singh. In his defence, Singh questioned the jurisdiction of the Forum, as he resided in Nallasopara in Thane District. Singh also claimed that the amount paid to him was not for depositing the tax payable, but towards his fees. To falsify this contention, Fernandes applied to the Forum to direct Singh to produce his own IT returns, which would reveal whether this amount had been disclosed as his fees. Singh, when ordered to produce his returns, appears to have panicked, has stopped appearing in order to avoid producing these.
The forum noted a part of the cause of action had arisen within its territorial jurisdiction, as Singh had been engaged to appear in the I-T proceedings at Ballard Estate in South Mumbai. So the Forum concluded that the complaint was maintainable before it.
On merits, the Forum observed, Singh had failed to show what work he had carried out, or how he had charged his fees. Singh had also failed to produce his own I-T returns to support his contentions. In contrast, Fernandes had substantiated his contention by producing the receipts issued by another Chartered Accountant who was subsequently engaged to carry out the entire work.
In its order of July 10, 2015, delivered by S M Ratnakar for the Bench along with S G Chabukswar, the forum indicted Singh of rendering deficient services and indulging in unfair trade practices. It ordered Singh to refund the entire amount of Rs 2,32,863, along with nine per cent annual interest from July 17, 2009, the date Fernandes demanded a refund. The Forum also directed Singh to pay compensation of Rs 5,000 for causing mental agony, and Rs 3,000 towards costs.
Any professional is expected to behave prudently. If he fails to do so, or acts in a reckless or negligent manner, he can be hauled up before a consumer forum. (Business Standard)
Category : Chartered Accountant | Comments : 1 | Hits : 2378
Get Free Daily Updates Via e-Mail on Income Tax, Service tax, Excise and Corporate law
Search News
News By Categories More Categories
- Income Tax Dept serves notices to salaried individuals for documentary proof to claim exemptions
- Bank Branch Audit 2021 - Update on allotment of Branches
- Bank Branch Audit 2020 Updates
- Bank Branch Audit 2021 Updates
- Bank Branch Audit 2020 - Update on Allotment of Branches
- Police Atrocities towards CA in Faridabad - Its Time to be Unite
- Bank Branch Statutory Audit Updates 2019
- Bank Branch Statutory Audit Updates
- Bank Branch Audit 2022 Updates
- Bank Branch Statutory Audit Updates
- NFRA Imposes Monetary penalty of Rs 1 Crore on M/s Dhiraj & Dheeraj
- ICAI notifies earlier announced CA exam dates despite pending legal challenge before SC
- NFRA debars Auditors, imposes Rs 50 lakh penalties for lapses in Brightcom, CMIL cases
- GST Important Update - Enhancement in the GST Portal
- NFRA Slaps Rs 5 lakh Penalty on Audit Firm for lapses in Vikas WSP Audit Case
- CBDT extends due date for filing Form 10A/10AB upto 30th June, 2024
- RBI comes out with FEMA regulations for direct listing on international exchange
- RBI directs payment firms to track high-value, fishy transactions during elections
- NCLT orders insolvency proceedings against Subhash Chandra
- Income Tax dept starts drive to dispose of appeals, 0.54 million at last count
- Payment of MCA fees –electronic mode-regarding
- Budget '11-12' Parliament Completes Approval Exercise
- Satyam restrained from operating its accounts
- ICICI a foreign firm, subject to FDI norms: Govt
- Maha expects Rs 15 crore entertainment tax revenue from IPL
- CAG blames PMO for not acting against Kalmadi
- No service tax on visa facilitators: CBEC
- Provision of 15-minutes reading and planning time allowance to the candidates of Chartered Accountants Examinations
- Companies Bill to be taken up in Monsoon Session
- File Service Tax Return in time as Maximum Penalty increased 10 times to Rs. 20000
Comments
Abhijit Salian
05-Aug-2015 , 12:04:17 pmICAI should also take action against such CA's otherwise it wont take long for reputation of the profession to be questioned in every forum.