<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1954 (5) TMI 9 - HIGH COURT OF ASSAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97293</link>
    <description>Before accepting appointment as auditor, a chartered accountant must verify that the statutory requirements for auditor appointment have been complied with; failure to do so may amount to professional misconduct. The text treats a company&#039;s failure to appoint an auditor at its annual general meeting as not a mere casual vacancy that directors could fill under the temporary-vacancy provision. The respondent&#039;s mistaken reliance on that provision did not defeat the charge, although youth and inexperience were relevant in assessing discipline. The misconduct was proved, but the circumstances were considered insufficient to justify a finding that he was unfit to remain a member of the Institute, so a warning was regarded as an adequate consequence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 May 1954 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2012 11:57:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134351" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1954 (5) TMI 9 - HIGH COURT OF ASSAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97293</link>
      <description>Before accepting appointment as auditor, a chartered accountant must verify that the statutory requirements for auditor appointment have been complied with; failure to do so may amount to professional misconduct. The text treats a company&#039;s failure to appoint an auditor at its annual general meeting as not a mere casual vacancy that directors could fill under the temporary-vacancy provision. The respondent&#039;s mistaken reliance on that provision did not defeat the charge, although youth and inexperience were relevant in assessing discipline. The misconduct was proved, but the circumstances were considered insufficient to justify a finding that he was unfit to remain a member of the Institute, so a warning was regarded as an adequate consequence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 May 1954 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97293</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>