Chartered accountancy practice limits: coaching advertisements and use of "CA" did not amount to contempt.

Advertisements for coaching classes and the use of the prefix "CA" did not amount to wilful breach of an undertaking not to practise chartered accountancy. Applying section 2(2) of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949, the court noted that a member is in practice only when offering accountancy, auditing, verification, or related professional services, or holding himself out to the public as an accountant. The material showed only coaching activity for aspirants and no representation that professional accountancy services were being offered. As the respondent remained registered and had not been removed from the rolls, contempt was not made out.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondent's issuance of advertisements for coaching classes and use of the prefix "CA" amounted to wilful violation of the undertaking not to practice the profession of chartered accountancy, warranting contempt.

Analysis: The undertaking restrained the respondent from practicing as a chartered accountant. Under section 2(2) of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949, a member is deemed to be in practice when he engages in accountancy work, offers auditing or related professional services, or holds himself out to the public as an accountant. The advertisements relied on showed only coaching activity for aspirants of the profession and did not indicate that the respondent was offering accountancy, auditing, verification, or related professional services. The use of "CA" was not treated as a breach because the respondent remained registered as a chartered accountant and had not been removed from the rolls.

Conclusion: The respondent did not wilfully violate the undertaking, and contempt was not made out.

---