Court :
ITAI Mumbai
Brief :
The appeals filed by the assessee for AY 1994-95 and 1996-97 were delayed by 2984 days. The assessee claimed that he was advised by his CAM/s Rajesh Rajeev Associatesthat since he had already filed an appeal for AY 1993-94 which was pending before the Tribunal, he need not file appeals for AYs 1994-95 & 1996-97 and that a rectification application can be filed before the AO after adjudication of appeal for AY 1993-94 by the Tribunal. Also the CA confirmed through an affidavit that he had given such advice. The assessee pleaded that he need not suffer from the incorrect advice by the CA. Held that the advice given by the CA firm shows signs of deteriorating standards with some CAs in profession, which needs to be stopped on war footing by ICAI. If it is considered that the said C.A. firm has really given such advices, it may require disciplinary action for giving such kind of advices, without proper verification of facts and proper consideration of law. Strict actions and fast disposal of disciplinary proceedings would not only instill discipline among the C.A fraternity, but also help curtail these kind of undesired practices adopted by some CAs.
Citation :
Shri Vijay V Meghani – Appellant – Versus – Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax – Respondent
Browse CAclubindia ads free.
Latest updates on WA.
Daily E-Newsletter and much more.
CCI PRO annual subscription :
Duration : 1 year
(Prices Inclusive of GST)
All Subjects Combo (Regular Batch) Jan & May 26