https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296021 Restrictions capping the number of tax audit assignments and fixing audit-related fees for practising chartered accountants were examined under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g). The Madras High Court treated audit allocation and professional fees as matters ordinarily governed by free choice and mutual agreement within the profession. It held that an external cap on assignments, introduced to redistribute work, was arbitrary and an unreasonable restriction not saved by Article 19(6). It further held that prescribed fee-related controls intruded into the professional-client relationship and were likewise unconstitutional. en-us Thu, 24 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Dec 2021 13:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296021 Restrictions capping the number of tax audit assignments and fixing audit-related fees for practising chartered accountants were examined under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g). The Madras High Court treated audit allocation and professional fees as matters ordinarily governed by free choice and mutual agreement within the profession. It held that an external cap on assignments, introduced to redistribute work, was arbitrary and an unreasonable restriction not saved by Article 19(6). It further held that prescribed fee-related controls intruded into the professional-client relationship and were likewise unconstitutional. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 24 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296021