https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215028 Section 21A(4) of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 was read as giving the Board of Discipline discretion to close a matter where the Director (Discipline) finds no prima facie case, or to seek further investigation if it disagrees. The Director's prima facie view was treated as tentative, with the final decision on misconduct remaining for the Board of Discipline or the Disciplinary Committee. Rule 9(3)(b) was held to fit within that statutory framework because it sets out the procedure when the Board disagrees, rather than limiting the Board's powers. Accordingly, the rule was not ultra vires section 21A(4). en-us Mon, 05 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Sep 2022 15:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215028 Section 21A(4) of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 was read as giving the Board of Discipline discretion to close a matter where the Director (Discipline) finds no prima facie case, or to seek further investigation if it disagrees. The Director's prima facie view was treated as tentative, with the final decision on misconduct remaining for the Board of Discipline or the Disciplinary Committee. Rule 9(3)(b) was held to fit within that statutory framework because it sets out the procedure when the Board disagrees, rather than limiting the Board's powers. Accordingly, the rule was not ultra vires section 21A(4). Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 05 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215028