Imported analyser diagnostic cartridges treated as accessories with analyser system, not standalone diagnostic reagents; extended limitation and penal...
Steel-timber construction shuttering/formwork tariff classification dispute: essential character held steel, classified as shuttering under Heading 73...
Family-linked property purchases using fabricated loan agreements and benami-style arrangements held to be crime proceeds; attachment upheld, appeal d...
Charitable tree plantation and maintenance for environmental preservation treated as "charitable activity", exempt from GST under Notification 12/2017...
Page of 4824
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
7821 to 7840 of 96463 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that under s.21 of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 read with Regulation 16, the Council must independently apply its mind to the disciplinary committee's report and the member's representation, and record reasoned findings before making recommendations. In this case, although multiple charges of professional misconduct and gross negligence against the respondent auditor were held proved by the disciplinary committee, the Council's report lacked independent findings and showed non-application of mind. Treating this as a substantive procedural defect, HC exercised powers under s.21(5), set aside the Council's report and recommendation, and remitted the matter to the Council for fresh consideration and disposal in accordance with law.
HC held that under s.21 of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 read with Regulation 16, the Council must independently apply its mind to the disciplinary committee's report and the member's representation, and record reasoned findings before making recommendations. In this case, although multiple charges of professional misconduct and gross negligence against the respondent auditor were held proved by the disciplinary committee, the Council's report lacked independent findings and showed non-application of mind. Treating this as a substantive procedural defect, HC exercised powers under s.21(5), set aside the Council's report and recommendation, and remitted the matter to the Council for fresh consideration and disposal in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.