The President and members of the Council of the Institute of Cost and Works Accountants of India express their utmost unhappiness on the passing of the ICWAI Amendment Bill in the Rajya Sabha on 12th Dec 2011, by which the name was proposed to be changed to the Institute of Cost Accountants of India. Our Institute strongly objects to the move by the sister professional body in interfering the activities of the another professional body to encourage foreign management accounting bodies to establish their presence in India to the detriment of Indian professionals. The Hon’ble Minister in his reply to the debate in Rajya Sabha also questioned “Afterindependence, why a colonial name like Chartered should be there. You know,this is a matter which is left to the Chartered Accountants of India to consider.”
We also demand that in the post independence era let the Government also change the name of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India into some other name or remove the name “Chartered”. While for this the Government feels that it is the matter which has to be taken up by the Chartered Institute, in our case we find that without our consent our name is proposed to be changed at the behest of The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India. The dominant position enjoyed by the Chartered Accountants are taken advantage by that Institute in creating block for a sister professional body which is catering to the youth to get a professional accounting qualification while working in whatever employment they are already in, to further their growth prospects.
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India have been continuously interfering with the name change of our Institute, objecting to the name by which the similar cost accounting bodies across the globe are called. Unfortunately, due to their dominant position which was recognized even in the Report of the Standing Committee of Parliament, our genuine request is not heeded by the Government. In the Rajya Sabha’s debate during the Bill many Honourable Members commented that the entry of foreign consulting firms through surrogate Indian audit firms should not be encouraged.
They also commented that “That is why it is quite possible that money is illegally taken by some entities to foreign countries with the advice and superb consultancy with the Chartered Accountants ……. That is why along with the quantity of Chartered Accountants ……… the professional ethics in this country, unfortunately, are declining very fast and sometimes feel that it is going to the point beyond no repairs.” In another statement in the same debate Honourable members commented “Now in the recent 2G scam, you will be surprised to know
that in all the cases of all these companies, whatever certificates were given by the auditors that their authorized capital is this much and paid up capital is this much, were false. They got the license on the basis of false certificates issued by the auditors. It is a very serious issue Sir”.
The growth of membership as well as students in the past five years of ICWAI has been phenomenal with the growth rate of 30% every year. The students are growing at the rate of more than 50% in recent years. This shows that the youth of the country have recognized that a major opportunity lies in acquiring a professional qualification. In all the cases which was mentioned in the Rajya Sabha debate the Chartered Accountancy profession was targeted but ultimately the punishment was handed over to the Cost Accounting profession which has no role in these scams. Through this exercise, the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India have enabled foreign management accounting bodies to establish their presence in India. Indirectly this is creating a position of dominance for the Chartered Accounting Institute, which goes against the principles the Government is trying to establish through the Competition policy.
The 50,000 members and 4,00,000 students all over the country are pained due to this unfortunate development. The Central Council Members, Office Bearers of the Regional Councils & Chapters of the Institute have started to send their resignation to the President as a mark of protest against this unfair activity of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India in preventing the just demand of our profession.
THE MOST INTRIGUING PART IS THAT OUR INSTITUTE (ICAI) TOO RECOGNISED THE FACT THAT USING "CHARTERED" WORD WAS CLEARLY INSUBORDINATING THE PROFESSION OF ACCOUNTANCY AT THE MERCY(OR DEDICATED) TO THE ROYAL QUEEN OF GREAT BRITAIN AND HER LORDSHIP.
THIS APPAERED ONCE IN THE ICAI JOURNAL:(Contributed by Journal section)
AGAINST DISCRIMINATION: STRUGGLE FOR THE DESIGNATION CHARTERED
Through their constitution Indian Society of Accountants and
Auditors, in Bombay, Registered accountants systematically
attempted to secure the appellation, Chartered Accountant,
for themselves through a memorandum. This memorandum
was discussed during the discussions on the sub-Clause (b)
of the Clause 75 of the Companies (Amendment) Bill in the
Legislative Assembly on March 23, 1936, which purported to
amend the Section 144 of the Bill by adding to its sub-Section
(2B): and when so acting to append to his signature the style
‘Chartered Accountant (India)’. As a result, the Legislative
Assembly witnessed an organised effort for securing the
desired designation of ‘chartered’ with an almost agreement
among the members of the Assembly. The memorandum
read on page 6:
‘We should be allowed to carry on as accountants
in our own motherland with a decent and selfrespecting
status, without any artificial device being
imposed on us which would brand us, and, therefore,
the whole nation, with an inferiority complex.’
This memorandum was a reminder of another
recommendation of the Indian External Capital Committee
in 1925 that steps should be taken to establish the order
of the chartered accountants in this country, which was not
taken up by the Government. The Committee that included
*Contributed by the Journal Section of ICAI
Not all Indian accountants were chartered accountants despite their like abilities and, thereby resulting,
rightfulness to audit accounts of companies in India. Accountants who were members of the chartered
societies of the United Kingdom, were allowed to use the designation Chartered Accountant. These
accountants were socially perceived and considered as accountants of higher order than the accountants
whose names were simply enrolled in the Register of the Governor General in Council, i.e. Registered
accountants. The Council authorised accountants to audit by granting them a certificate of practice. General
perception of the investors and common public was that accountants without the designation ‘chartered’
were inferior auditors. This negative distinction and inferior treatment revolutionised the Registered
accountants for a fight for equality and gradually instigated them towards a struggle for dignity.
Through their constitution Indian Society of Accountants and
Auditors, in Bombay, Registered accountants systematically
attempted to secure the appellation, Chartered Accountant,
for themselves through a memorandum. This memorandum
was discussed during the discussions on the sub-Clause (b)
of the Clause 75 of the Companies (Amendment) Bill in the
Legislative Assembly on March 23, 1936, which purported to
amend the Section 144 of the Bill by adding to its sub-Section
(2B): and when so acting to append to his signature the style
‘Chartered Accountant (India)’. As a result, the Legislative
Assembly witnessed an organised effort for securing the
desired designation of ‘chartered’ with an almost agreement
among the members of the Assembly. The memorandum
read on page 6:
‘We should be allowed to carry on as accountants
in our own motherland with a decent and selfrespecting
status, without any artificial device being
imposed on us which would brand us, and, therefore,
the whole nation, with an inferiority complex.’
This memorandum was a reminder of another
recommendation of the Indian External Capital Committee
in 1925 that steps should be taken to establish the order
of the chartered accountants in this country, which was not
taken up by the Government. The Committee that included
members like Pt. Madan Mohan Malviya, Mr. Vithalbhai Patel
and Sir P. S. Sivaswami Aiyer suggested a formation of the
all-India Institute of chartered accountants.
The President of the Legislative Assembly was Sir Abdur
Rahim. The discussions in the assembly, however, started
with discouraging argumentations from Mr. Sushil Chandra
Sen (a nominated official of the Government of India) and
Sir Nripendranath Sircar (a Law Member of the Viceroy’s
Executive Council). Mr. K. Ahmad (from Rajshahi Division)
helped them further. Mr. Sen considered the memorandum
an effort of usurping the superior designation without
holding any merit: there was ‘neither any logic nor any
justification for bestowing a designation’. Sir Sircar was quite
popular among the English for attacking the Indians being
an Indian. In this case too, he warned: ‘any efforts on the
part of the Government of India to take up this matter will
be a cause of retardation and not progress, so far as the
Indian accountants are concerned.’ He pointed out that this
designation will ‘enable them to commit a fraud, on at least
a part of the public by posing as Chartered Accountants’ and
tried to ridicule the members-in-support in lowly language.
He also informed the Assembly to have received many letters
of protest and resolutions from Indians at Calcutta objecting
to the provision made by the Select Committee (that it
was mandatory for the auditor to get a certificate from
the Governor General in Council to act as an auditor and
that the Government might make rules for grant, renewal,
or, cancellation of such certificatesand can provide for the
maintenance of a register of accountants, can prescribe
qualifications and emoluments on the register, and, so on).
Mohan Lal Saxena (Lucknow Division) and Pt. Krishna
Dutt Paliwal were among the firsts to rise to the defence
of the Registered accountants’ case. They were then amply
supported by Mr. N. M. Joshi (nominated non-official),
Pt. Govind Ballabh Pant (Rohilkund and Kumaon Division),
Pt. Krishna Kant Malaviya (Benaras and Gorakhpur Division),
Pt. Lakshmi Kanta Maitra (Presidency
Division), Sir H. P. Mody (Bombay
Millowners’ Association), Mr. M. S.
Aney (Berar Representative), Sir
Cowasji Jehangir (Bombay City),
Mr. M. A. Jinnah (Bombay Division)
and Mr. Bhulabhai Desai (Bombay
Northern Division). Mr. Jinnah came
out slowly but strongly to the extent:
‘Mind you, I stand for Indian talent,
I want complete privileges and same
rights as those given to anybody
else in my country.’ Pt. Malviya, Pt.
Pant, Sir Jehangir and Mr. Desai
argued thoroughly for the cause of
the Registered accountants. In fact, it was Mr. Bhulabhai
Desai who first mentioned the need ‘to create by means of a
statute an autonomous body of accountants in India’ so that
the body would have a constitution of its own and a power to
grant the required designation. Finally the Deputy Speaker
Shri Akhil Chandra Datta pronounced the motion adopted.
Such a promise from the Government was fulfilled only
after the appointment of the Accountancy Expert Committee
in 1948 that decided to call all practicing Registered
accountants by Chartered accountants. After this, the
dealing Ministry (of Commerce) sought the opinion of the
Ministry of Law, which noted: ‘…a Charter can only be
granted by the Crown…’ In the second and final meeting of
the Committee in June 1948, the Chairman Mr. C. C. Desai
discussed the draft Bill and the legal difficulty in adopting
the recommended designation. It was also discussed that
Indian accountants must be called chartered accountants
only, as this designation inherited a public impression that
chartered accountants had better qualification. Mr. G. P.
Kapadia, a member of the Board then, supported and shared
the same concern. It was then decided to call the Act as
Chartered Accountants Act. Then the Ministry of Commerce
referred its recommendations on the adoption of the name
to the Ministry of Law, while noting the positive advantages
against this adoption. The Ministry of Law noted that the
Dominion Parliament is not incompetent to make a law to
that effect and expressed its view that the Act should not be
called Chartered, as charter meant royal charter by British
usage. The Ministry of Commerce noted the viewpoint of
the Ministry of Law and by referring to the speeches made
by Pt. Paliwal, Pt. Pant and Mr. B. Desai, and concluded
that there was ‘no insuperable legal objection in using the
designation ‘Chartered Accountants’ that precedents exist in
other parts of’ the British Dominions. It further agreed that
the same might be adopted ‘for designating the members of
the profession in this country.’
Mr. S. B. Billimoria, a member of the Indian Accountancy
Board, submitted to the Accountancy Expert Committee
in June 1948 that it would not be legally correct to use
‘chartered accountants’. He cited the example of the
American accountants and their Institute and said that their
standing was not any low in comparison to the chartered
accountants and institutes for the same. However, the
Committee, after careful consideration, decided that
‘the members of the profession in this country should be
designated as Chartered Accountants.’ A little later in July
1948, a member of the Committee, Mr. N. R. Mody, voiced
his concerns over the designation accepted and suggested
alternatives to the Committee. However, the Committee
went ahead with its decision. During the 18th meeting of
the Indian Accountancy Board, Mr. Kapadia informed that
the Charter of the English Institute was being amended
and that an application regarding the abolishment of
the prohibition of the use of the designation ‘Chartered
Accountants’ was in process. Mr. S. Ranganathan, the
Chairman of the Board, suggested that the Board did not
recommend the practice of using ‘(India)’ as part of the
designation and everybody agreed.
The Government drew attention of the Cabinet to
the recommendations of the Expert Committee that
the Registered Accountants should be called Chartered
Accountants in future and an institute of Chartered
Accountants should be incorporated by a special Act of the
Legislature, despite an objection raised by the Ministry of
Finance over the designation, which was duly responded
by the Ministry of Commerce. The Chartered Accountants
Bill as vetted by the Ministry of Law was introduced in
the Constituent Assembly of India and was consequently
referred to the Select Committee that submitted its
supportive report along with the redrafted Bill on March
1, 1949, despite a dissent from its member Mr. H. P. Mody
who opposed the adoption. The Committee redrafted
especially Clause 7 of the Bill by inserting its comments
on the name of the firm of chartered accountants. There
were no further obstacles and the Bill retaining the
Select Committee’s corrections was eventually passed
by the Legislature and assented to by the Governor
General.
The discussions held in the Legislative Assembly and their patriotic
undercurrent, even today, retain the power to affect and
impress all about the glorious caretakers and their passion for
the accountancy profession in their times. Readers will sure find
the following excerpts from the historic debate in March 1936
not only interesting but inspiring too, especially so because the
people who argued for the case were politically quite aware of
their rights and responsibilities:
Pandit Shri Krishna Dutta Paliwal:
“In the first place, the Indian Society of Accountants
and Auditors say that the belief that the designation of
“Chartered Accountants” is the exclusive and monopolised
privilege of the chartered accountants who are qualified
only in England is erroneous. In fact, such is not the
case. Almost all the Dominions in the British Empire
(except India) have themselves provided, independently
of the English qualification, for the awarding to their
nationals the designation of “Chartered Accountants” by
the legislative enactments. Sir, it is written here in the
memorandum sent by the Indian Society of Accountants
and Auditors that the designation “Chartered Accountants”
is allowed in the following countries: Canada, Alberta,
British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia,
Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Quebec, Saskatchewan,
South Africa, Transvaal, Natal, Cape of Good Hope,
Orange Free State, South Rhodesia. So the suggestion
of my Honourable friend that this designation is confined
only to these five or six societies in UK is wrong. I submit
this is done in all other parts of the British Empire also.
Now, Sir, I admit that this is done not by the Company’s
law but by special laws enacted for the purpose.”
“It may be said or it may be hinted that the
professional qualifications of the Indian accountants are not
so good as those of the “Chartered Accountants” of other
countries – I say that it is not so. The Indian Society of
Accountants and Auditors says: ‘Regarding the tests in general
education, and practical training and the range of knowledge
in professional subjects required by Government before
granting the auditor’s diploma of Registered Accountant,
they are undoubtedly rigorous and connote a high standard
and a wide range of professional attainments as admitted
by the Government themselves and they compare quite
favourably with those required in England and in other British
Dominions...’…I do not understand why Indian accountants
should be put to any disadvantage for the benefit of the
British or England-returned accountants.”
“Why should they (Indian accountants) be prevented
from designating themselves as “Chartered Accountants”
simply for the advantage of those who have wasted the
hard-earned money of Indian in other countries? How is
it justifiable that for that very reason and no other, these
England-returned accountants should demand special
privileges for themselves? I have seen the syllabuses
which are prescribed for the Accountancy examinations
in different parts of the British Empire, and I am satisfied
that the Indian examination is as stiff, I may even say, it
is superior in certain respects to the examination which
the accountants in other countries, especially these socalled
“Chartered Accountants” have to undergo.”
“…another inconvenience which the Indian accountants
have to suffer on account of this invidious distinction is
that investors and the general public wrongly believe that
if an auditor does not hold the designation of “Chartered
Accountant”, he is no good and he is looked upon as an
inferior class of auditor. Even Courts of law in India while
passing orders in matters concerning accounts and audit
at times inadvertently make similar mistakes.”
Pandit Krishna Kant Malviya:
“Aristotle thought that man is a social being, Karl Marx
and others also of his way of thinking made out that
man is always actuated by selfish motives, that classes
always are anxious to crush the masses. Fraud and Jung
have come to the conclusion that s*xual instinct is the
incentive for all our activities, and so on, but Sir, it was
left to the Honourable the Law Member to come forward
and declare that our poor registered accountants only
wanted to be chartered accountants because they are
anxious to commit frauds and to deceive the unwary
public…The Governor General or the Viceroy in every-day
parlance is said to represent the King but so far as the
poor registered accountants are concerned, he cannot
issue a royal charter; and what these poor accountants
feel is this, that in their own motherland they cannot rise
to the highest positions. In spite of passing examinations,
in spite of all that they may do, they will be dubbed as
inferior beings. This is what they resent.”
“Why is it that there is a glamour around the name of
the chartered accountants? Why is it that the Government
of Indian themselves attach more importance to an
examination which is held in a foreign country as compared
with the examination which they hold themselves? The
Registered Accountants want that the Government of
Indian should raise the standard of examination as high
as possible. These accountants are proficient and are
well up so far as their duties are concerned, and they say
that they should be allowed to call themselves chartered
accountants, or anything which will suit the Government
of India and which will compel the latter to regard them as
the best in this land, as those who can be compared with
the best in other lands.”
Pandit Govind Ballabh Pant:
“…it seems to me really incomprehensible as to why the
Government should not be prepared to call people, who
are entirely under their control, chartered accountants
if they are prepared to empower other bodies to give
them that designation? It comes to this that because a
person is entirely under my control and because I can
regulate the syllabus, the examination and everything
that has to be done with reference to the examination
of accountancy, therefore he should not be called a
chartered accountant, but if I were to entrust these
duties to another independent person, then we can do
so! That is really illogical.”
“If Honorable Members will be pleased to look at
Section 144, they will find that no Act framed with the
sole object of establishing a Board of Accountancy and
of prescribing a designation for persons securing the
certificates through such examinations could be more
thorough than this Section 144…It controls and regulates
the entire profession, Accountancy for the whole of India,
for the formation of Local Accountancy Boards, for the
registration of qualified Accountants, for the control of
their professional etiquette and all other things connected
with the establishment, constitution
and regulation of these Boards. Now,
Sir, are we to be blamed because this
provision forms part of the Companies
Act and is not a separate statute by
itself?”
“If there are anomalies, who
is to blame for it? Why did they not
take steps to establish this order of
Chartered Accountants in this country
as recommended unanimously by this
Committee in 1925 and since then
twelve long years have elapsed, but no
steps have been taken to establish this
order of Chartered Accountants in this
country.”
“…the difference is only this, that
while the members of the Indian CivilService are called I.C.S. the members of the provincial
civil services in our country performing duties even more
onerous and responsible, because they are brown in
colour, are called P.C.S. and get lower salary emoluments.
That is the main difference. So far as the status in the
matter of duties and responsibilities goes, I do not
see any distinction between the two. The fact remains
that a registered accountant is an Indian, - registered
accountants are exclusively Indian, - but so far as the
fairies only a few lucky Indians are admitted. So, Sir, the
difference is not altogether non-racial.”
“Does Sir Homi Mody really think that an ordinary
company manager here really knows the difference
between a registered accountant and a Chartered
Accountant? Why does he favour a Chartered Accountant?
Why does he favour a Chartered Accountant at the cost
of a registered accountant? ...The difference is that the
man has only heard the name Chartered Accountant. The
name Registered Accountant
is not known; so men who
have gone through the fire
here and possess similar
qualifications are denied
the opportunity which they
are entitled to because of
the wrong designation. And
why should this invidious
distinction be made in the
name?
“I want a common
status for all of them; but
I am prepared to offer a
compromise, and it is this.
Let it be a rule that even
Chartered Accountants
practicing in this country
will be called Registered
Accountants…If they are
registered, call them also
Registered Accountants. Do
not accept their status as
Chartered Accountants as
adequate for the discharge
of their duties here. It is
because they are registered
here that they possess those
qualifications. Eliminate
that phrase “Chartered
Accountant”, call them
Registered Accountants.
Make it penal for anybody to
call himself a Chartered Accountant here, and I will not
quarrel. Let all be called Registered Accountants. That
also will satisfy my sense of national pride; it will give me
equality with other alien people.”
“Up to this time I had thought there was no distinction
made, but when I was told that it is fraud to allow
these people to call themselves Chartered Accountants,
then I discovered that there was some distinction in
the background to him these people, otherwise, so
far as the performance of duties and the discharge of
responsibilities go, these people are as fully qualified
as the Chartered Accountants, with this difference that
Chartered Accountants get higher fees…”
“Sometimes one may require a telescope to distinguish
the faces of his own country men sitting opposite to
him. I do not quite see what their colour is, what their
complexion is, what is in their heart, - I do not know if
they have a soul or not. For that I require a telescope,
though they have a soul
or not. For that I require
a telescope, though they
are sitting just opposite to
me. So it may be necessary
to have a microscope for
looking at these letters.
But, Sir, is there no remedy
to be found for this, while
these unscrupulous people
may put in the letters ‘Ind.’
in that obscure, illegible
manner, is there anything
to prevent others from
advertising “Non-Ind.”
In blazing waving lines
that may be seen from a
distance of 101 miles.”
“Sir, we have M.A.’s and
LL.B.’s as in Cambridge, but
our people do not put ‘Ind.’
after their degrees. There
are mechanical engineers
again qualified in England as
in India. Are not their titles
common? Are we thereby
defrauding the employers?
This glamour for foreign
degrees and diplomas
will continue under this
hypnotism of foreign rule.
We are told that we are
suffering from an inferiority
complex. I do not mind suffering from an inferiority
complex if it goads us on to a superior status, but I do
not want superior arrogance if it tends to perpetuate an
inferior status.”
Sir Cowasji Jehangir:
“There is no crime in any body of professional men making
a memorial to Government stating that they desire to
have in their motherland the same status, the same
position as any one else, be they their own countrymen
or not, educated in a foreign country. There is no crime
in drawing the attention of Government to their feelings
of disappointment, after years of petitioning, at not being
allowed to have that status in their own country.”
“There were accountants in India before 1925. They
audited accounts and nobody challenged their authority
to do so; and many of those men are alive today,
men who had not passed the examination specified
in section 144, and who are still efficiently doing their
work as accountants. They are not called registered
accountants; they have a registered of their own and
they will soon naturally die out. In the same way, the
registered accountants say: “You have made us pass an
examination; you now call us registered accountants;
why do you not put us on the same basis and give us
the same status that accountants have in different parts
of the Empire?” Is it a crime to aspire to be put in the
same position in India as the South African is in South
Africa? Is it a crime to desire and petition Government
that they should in future give Indian accountants the
same position and the same status that a Canadian has
in Canada?”
“Because the fact that a man happens to be a
chartered accountant or an incorporated accountant
signifies nothing to me till I see his work, and I have
known cases where chartered accountants have been
very poor specimens of their profession, and I have
known registered accountants who have been first class
professional men in their own work. I have also been
informed, - my information may, or may not be accurate,
nut it comes from a good source, viz., the men who
have been examiners for these registered accountants
– that the syllabus which is now laid down for registered
accountants is no inferior to the syllabus laid down in
England.”
“The difference is that an Indian going to England for
three or four years naturally is in a different atmosphere
to that in his own country, and naturally he has perhaps
better opportunities of gaining experience. That is
certainly an advantage, and I would be the last to deny
the advantage that is gained by an Indian who lives
in Europe for two or three years. I do not deny that
advantage, but my information is that that is the only
difference.”
Mr. Mohammad Ali Jinnah:
“But I want to make my position more clear generally. At
present, there is nothing at all to prevent any company
from appointing an auditor who holds a certificate,
whether he be a chartered accountant or a registered
accountant. One is as good as the other within the
meaning of the statute. Apart from the qualifications, my
friend, Sir Cowasji Jehangir, pointed out that there are
certain Indian Registered Accountants who are far more
efficient and far superior to any chartered accountant.
We have got instances in other professions also.”
“If an ordinary litigant attaches more importance to
me than to my friend, the Leader of the Opposition, and
says “Well, Mr. Jinnah is a barrister while my friend, the
Leader of the Opposition, is an Advocate”, same footing,
we have the same rights and the same privileges, and
if some misguided person attaches more importance to
me because I am a barrister, well it is his misfortune. My
friend, the Leader of the Opposition, may be far superior.
Therefore, Sir, it really comes down to this. A glamour is
attached to Chartered Accountants…”
“Mind you, I stand for Indian talent, I want complete
privileges and same rights as those given to anybody
else in my country. But let us proceed in some methodical
manner. I do hope that the Government will not any
longer delay in taking up this matter.”
Mr. Bhulabhai J. Desai:
“…if it was competent to the Governor-General in Council
to call them “R.A.”, they could equally and easily have
been called Chartered Accountants, India. It is purely
a question of name which is given. It is a same which
can be altered at their pleasure, because ‘Registered
Accountants’ is an artificial descriptttion…It is within the
power of the Governor General in Council within the
meaning of section 144 and the rule making powers in
that behalf to give any designation they think proper
as the Act stands at present. But if the intention is to
create by means of a statute an autonomous body of
Accountants in India.”
“I certainly would prefer it, and though it is
competent within the law to do it, yet because of the
promised creation of a body of Accountants with an
autonomous constitution of their own having the power
to grant degrees and give designations, and in particular
“Chartered Accountants (India)”, we do not think it
ICWAI is not able to answer any question for name change. They are just trying to dafeme ICAI. Management is bigger term than acounting . a proper solution may be found, But ICWAI is just trying to confront ICAI.
They are just trying to gain from the profesion which was gron by ca. They are following double standard toward their policy;
Once ICWAI says Chartered is colonial word ,, it should be deleted , it is mere politics. On the other hand ICWAI asking to make it like CIMA , which is UK Body.
They ar giving example of US and Canada , But our leaders can ask them to be a private body not statutory like one in USA and canada.
No , they do not have answer. They are just insisting name change .
Whatever the reason may be but the word "Chartered" is the life of Chartered Accountant profession. There is no doubt about that and should remain attached with ICAI.
Whatever the reason may be but the word "Chartered" is the life of Chartered Accountant profession. There is no doubt about that and should remain attached with ICAI.
