ITAT recommends disciplinary action against Chartered Accountant
THIS case had some very interesting turns and twists: An Income Tax assessee was accused of fraud in some share dealings and a minimum penalty was imposed on him, which was confirmed by CIT(A). The ITAT dismissed his appeal and he filed a further appeal in the High Court which was also dismissed. Thereafter instead of approaching the Supreme Court, the assessee came back to the Tribunal with a Rectification of Mistake application which was allowed. The assessee's counsel did not inform the Tribunal that its appeal against the ITAT order was dismissed by the High Court. This time Revenue filed a miscellaneous application pleading that the Tribunal cannot adjudicate the matter, which is already decided by the Superior Judicial Authority in the case of assessee.
Incidentally, criminal prosecution of the assessee was/is pending in court on the same issue.
The Tribunal noted that the conduct of the assessee and his counsel, C.A. in concealing the relevant and material fact from the Tribunal would amount to professional misconduct on the part of the Chartered Accountant. The Chartered Accountant has not only the duty to defend the case of litigant to the best of his ability, but equally has duty to maintain dignity and decorum of the courts. He has to assist the Bench as per law in arriving at the just decision in the matter. The C.A. consciously and deliberately in the garb of legal advice has concealed and suppressed the relevant and material facts from the Tribunal while filing miscellaneous application and arguing the same before the Tribunal.
The Tribunal therefore, recommended a disciplinary action against the Chartered Accountant. Copy of this order is to be forwarded to the President, Institute of Chartered Accountant of India, for necessary action in this regard. Copy of this order is also forwarded to the Chairman CBDT, to take necessary action in the matter.
The Tribunal also directed the CIT-I, Agra to place copy of this order before the Criminal Court where the criminal prosecution of the assessee is pending on the matter in issue for appraisal of the concerned court and ensure implementation of this order.
But was the CIT not aware of the High Court order when the case came to the Tribunal, the second time?