https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192855 Non-appearance by the respondent was not proved as professional misconduct because the complainant had already disengaged him and retained other representatives before the hearing. The allegations regarding receipt of money and an attempted further exaction by threat also failed for want of reliable evidence and inconsistencies in the complainant's account. By contrast, the correspondence showed an agreement to charge fees as a percentage of the relief obtained, and the HC held that such a contingent fee arrangement, entered into in connection with taxation work, fell within clause (m) of the Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949. Only that charge was sustained, attracting disciplinary consequence. en-us Tue, 17 Jul 1956 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Jun 2017 12:38:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192855 Non-appearance by the respondent was not proved as professional misconduct because the complainant had already disengaged him and retained other representatives before the hearing. The allegations regarding receipt of money and an attempted further exaction by threat also failed for want of reliable evidence and inconsistencies in the complainant's account. By contrast, the correspondence showed an agreement to charge fees as a percentage of the relief obtained, and the HC held that such a contingent fee arrangement, entered into in connection with taxation work, fell within clause (m) of the Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949. Only that charge was sustained, attracting disciplinary consequence. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 17 Jul 1956 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192855