After taking into companysideration the reply filed and the submissions made by the Respondent herein, the Disciplinary Committee vide order dated 12th January, 1995 held that the Respondent while issuing the certificates to the units had failed to obtain sufficient information to warrant the expression of his opinion and found him guilty of professional misconduct within the meaning of Clauses 7 and 8 of Part I of the Second Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 read with Sections 21 and 22 of the said Act.
The matter was thereafter placed before the Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, hereinafter referred to as the Council.
Further, the units did Signature Not Verified number maintain any record for past production, still the Digitally signed by ASHA SUNDRIYAL Date 2017.07.19 170249 IST Reason certificates were issued which shows that the figures were manipulated and the certificates issued were number companyrect.
Disciplinary action was taken against the Respondent herein for issuing certificates for companysumption of raw materials showing the value of imported raw material as CIF value to the units without seeing the records since imported value of the raw materials should have been shown as value of the raw materials and number the CIF value.
K. AGRAWAL, J. The present appeal arises out of the order dated 12.08.2004 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Chartered Accountants Reference No.5/2000.
