FORM 23B is required only if AUDITOR is appointed in AGM. Here AUDITOR is appointed by the BOD in board meeting Hence, My View is that F 23B not required to be filed with.
The Act, is silent about filing of Form-23B for first auditor. But as we read Form-23B there is no such restriction for filing of Form-23B for first auditor.
As per my view and as a good corporate practice you can file Form-23B with ROC.
As I understand the ACT is not silent but specific i.e. As per Section 224(1A) Form 23B is required to be filed only if the auditor is appointed under section 224(1) i.e. in AGM not u/s 224(5)i.e. First Auditor.
Plz read the Bare Act, AND plz clarify the problem.
14 September 2012
Hi Ajay, Fully appreciate the view of "corporate policy'. For the sake of EXAMINATION, the answer may be whatever... but as a sound corporate policy; which should be the need of the time, one should insist on filing 23B; instead of focussing on the "LITERLIGIS"
I had not fild f 23B in time and when I filed it lately. The ROC accepted it validly without any penalty for that,henceforht I was clarifying the View. thanks
14 September 2012
The intent comes first and then the same is put into WORDS. (Microsoft or other)While there is no harm in strictly sticking to WORDS, the professionals are expected to give more emphasis on the INTENT/ SUBSTANCE.