Stp system - triggered rate of false certification

Others 1033 views 5 replies

 

 

 

 

STP System - Reason for triggered rate of false certification

 

 

 

 

 

Ministry of Corporate Affairs has first implemented the Straight through processing system in the Annual filling and shifted their majority of the burden on the professional’s shoulders. Ministry of Corporate Affairs’ Annual filling Instruction kit is not clear till today, there are several important things missing in it like Form 23ACA’s

 

 

 

i.              Power and Fuel which Manufacturing Companies are using for manufacture of goods OR Other companies are using for their vehicles/office items like Computer, Light, etc. OR both (because Power and fuel amount will be material in case of Manufacture companies only and not for other companies).

 

ii.             Insurance Expense which Employee’s Insurance OR Stock OR Keyman Insurance OR Marine OR Fire OR anything else or everything. (because IT & Factory Companies have material amount in Employees’ Insurance amount, Export oriented companies have material amount in Fire Insurance, Trading companies have material amount in Stock Insurance and so on).

 

iii.            Rent Which Rent paid or Rent received (Only two person can write the figures correctly, 1.who hasn’t applied any logic and just entered the figures of rent paid or 2. Who knows the Rule of ejusdem generis)

 

 

 

Ministry of Corporate Affairs might think that Annual filling STP scheme was effective, but, I am sure they have never looked at the filling done by the professionals. Most of the listed companies Annual returns are defective in presenting the List of shareholders. Private companies don’t care about filling. Those who are filling, many a times provide the false data.

 

 

 

Then after Ministry of Corporate Affairs implemented the STP system in DIN also, But after a week of its implementation, we start seeing notice on MCA website about generation of notice to professionals, who are guilty of false certification. Ministry of Corporate Affairs came to know that its STP system was failure in case of DIN and plan to shift the responsibility on professionals’ shoulders is worthless, still they have done a daring job to introduce it in other segments like Incorporation of the Company (including Name approval), Major routine type of E-forms, etc. instead of looking into the facts of Annual filling STP system. We can interpret this decision in Gujarati Bapu’s Language (વાયડીનાઓની નકામી હોશિયારી!!).

 

 

 

Ministry of Corporate Affairs’ weakness as per their Strategic plan:

 

 

 

i.              Ineffective law not acting as a deterrent against corporate frauds (How it will act, If you don’t enforce the major provisions like Appointment of Company Secretary and provides a simplified clearance system for Non-attachment of subsidiary’s balance sheet, Managerial remuneration, etc).

 

 

 

ii.             Creation of large number of inoperative companies by stakeholders (Still you want to create more and more company in 24 or 48 Hours, instead working on re-functioning of that companies).

 

 

 

iii.            Poor level of ethics in companies/ professionals [Have you ever think about Ministry’s own ethical system, Gujarat’s ROC (Highest authority of Gujarat) is caught in Corruption case, If he is corrupt, who else will not be corrupt?].

 

 

 

iv.           Initial Act is old which needs rapid changes in the emerging environment (We always hear that in this monsoon, winter, summer, etc. session it will be tabled before the parliament, actually when it will be tabled before?).

 

 

 

v.            Inability to track down and punish the companies and individuals involved in Corporate Frauds (How will you track down, if you have STP system everywhere and Reliance on professionals only).

 

 

 

Link to Strategic Plan of MCA

 

 

 

I have applied under the Right to Information Act, 2005 for the details of Forms filed by the CS, CA and CWA and marked as the “Waiting for user clarification” and/or “Required Resubmission” for the period of one year, But Ministry has provided the data for only 1 day and at that time there were 238 E-forms in Gujarat-ROC only having that status.

 

 

 

If at the end of 1 day these much forms are defective, then how many at the end of 1 year and how many at the end of 1 year across India???

 

 

 

Link to Ministry’s reply of RTI Application 

Replies (5)

 

 

 

Comparison of CA and CS as Compliance Officer in the E-form matters

 

 

 

 

Everybody says that CA Institute has great lobbying power and by that they have not only created their place in every filed but also they are succeeded in changing the law as well as hold the change in the law.

 

 

 

CA Institute has made their place in MCA E-form system and they have held the law from changing with regard to the Tax Audit Limit of Rs. 40 Lacs. Currently it has been raised to 60 Lacs. But, If we compare the value of 40 Lacs at the time of effecting the law and current limit of Rs. 60 Lacs, they both have very high difference.

 

 

 

But, I don’t agree with this, CA Institute doesn’t have great lobbying power, But CS Institute’s council was/is failed to convey the Truth to the Authorities.

 

 

 

How is it possible that, knowledge level of CA, who has learned the Company Law (as minimum 40 marks to obtain category subject) is equal to CS, who has learned the Company Law (as maximum marks to obtain category subject). CA Course provide Company Law as complimentary subject for only 1 time and CS Course provides Company Law as primary subject every year.

 

 

 

Link to Subjects of both the Course

 

 

 

If CA shall be considered as an expert of Company Law and are authorized to sign the E-forms, after learning only 1 subject, then why CS should not be considered as expert of Income Tax after learning that subject 2 times? Why they should not be allowed to sign Tax Audit Report, Statutory Audit Report or other reports, etc?

 

 

 

Why Ministry of Corporate Affairs, RBI, SEBI and others forgot their own record that all professionals have same level of knowledge and they shall be authorized to sign also? (MCA and RBI’s reply on question about, why CAs are authorized to sign Secretarial Report?)

 

 

 

To all CAs: Your Institute is not great, but we have great persons in the Council, who cares about themselves only. God forgot to gift them with one thing, namely Intelligence. Because They are such dumb that, When one person replies to all the Council Members in writing, in legal matter that Council has not power to decide the matter, then also, they repeat the same thing and again decide that very same matter in Council’s meeting and notifies to that person after one month of the decision.

 

Credit Hours and Professional Development Programme

 

 

 

In the year of 2007, Guidelines for Compulsory Attendance of Professional Development Programmes for the Members has been issued by the Institute, which aims at

 

i.              Constantly upgrade professional competence and skills.

ii.             Sensitize them to new and emerging opportunities for service.

iii.            Assure users of professional services that they possess adequate skills commensurate with their professional responsibilities.

iv.           Improve their level of confidence to meet ever-changing demands on the profession.

 

As per that Guideline, Members in practice has to secure certain amount of Credit Hours on year wise basis later on the same was amended and made applicable to Members in employment too.  

 

As per that Guideline, Credit of only that programme will be given which has been considered as any Professional Development Program, Continuing Education Program or any Participative Certificate Program of the Institute or other bodies with whom MOU has been signed by the Institute.

 

Institute is organizing the National Convention, International fellowship development programme, etc. every year and awards members with the certain amount of credit hours.

 

But the question is, Are those programme satisfies the condition laid down in Section 2.1 of the Guidelines or meet the objectives of the Credit hour guidelines?

 

Institute is organizing the International fellowship development programme - Australia in the Month of November, 2011 and will award 4 credit hours, who will attend the programme. (As per the Guidelines of Institute, 4 Credit Hour means learning programme of more than 4 hours but less than single day).

 

For that 4-6 hours Institute is spending approximately Rs. 41.10 Lacs (15 Council Members * Rs. 1,65,000 (average of Australia Tour) + 15 Council Members * Rs. 1,09,000 (New Zealand Tour) - Double Occupancy

OR

For that 4-6 hours Institute is spending approximately Rs. 51.45 Lacs (15 Council Members * Rs. 2,02,000 (average of Australia Tour) + 15 Council Members * Rs. 1,41,000 (New Zealand Tour) - Single Occupancy

 

Institute is that much rich, that It can spend Rs. 41.10 – 51.45 Lacs for 4-6 hour training programme and that on International programme, when CS are been considered as Personal secretary by half of the Indians in their home country.

 

More shocking thing is that, Institute in its brochure of International fellowship development programme, nowhere mentioned, when will they hold seminar during the tour and for what time period? Their concentration is only on sight-seeing, Food and enjoyment only.

 

In that scenario, how they will develop the professionals? How this programme qualifies for approved learning programme?

 

If Narendra Modi’s Sadbhavna Mission fast expense of Rs. 60 crore can be considered as the Personal expenditure and not the state’s expenditure in the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) then why this programme’s expenditure shall not be recovered from the Council members’ own pocket?

 

This money can be utilized for so many good things like

1.    Filling of Writ of Mandamus against Ministry of Corporate Affairs for effecting Section 383A.

2.    410 study circle meeting can be held free of charge throughout the India (per SCM expense is 50 person * Rs. 250 for half day).

3.    Extra grants to needy students for coaching fees.

4.    Contribution to Members benevolent fund.

 

The options are endless. But these options are only for those councils, who actually care about their members. These options are not for our council members. I forgot that they will never change. I am just wasting my time.

 

Link to IFDP Brochure

Mr. Ankur Shah raised the very truth & poor story of CS persons and their profession. Many/ All of the CS facing the same problems -

In their job :

1) Not getting recognition.

2) They are deprived by managment from Financials.

3) Post of CS is the lower/ middle level management even company law says that, he is key managerial person of the Company.

4) They have no right to access of other dept. of the Company exclud. Secretarial or some times not of Legal.

Employment Problem :

1) Most of the CS facing the problem of unemployment.

2) Those who are in the job, not getting sufficient or expected salary as compare to any IT Person, CA, BE, HR Person or else.

3) Most of the Companies not appointing CS.

Request to Institute and MCA :

1) Allow and Open new fields for CS.

2) Do not allow CA & CWA to certify e-forms of MCA/ROC.

3) Compoulsory appoitnment of CS in the Companies whose turnover is more than 10 crores even paid up is not more than 5 crores.

I request to Mr. Ankur to go further with this movement we will support you.

Ankur

very thought provoking indeed. Go ahead with your ideas, vision.

Regards

Dipjyoti

Dear Ankur,

Definetly Very thought provoking - but dear it requires sheer guts to write in public forum. 

good job.


CCI Pro

Leave a Reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register