Facts of the Case
The
disciplinary proceedings arose from a complaint filed by Shri Arvind Kumar,
Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Jodhpur. The case originated from
detection of non-deposit of TDS and fraudulent income tax refunds in the name
of one Shri Ashish Goyal during 2015. Subsequent investigation revealed a
large-scale refund fraud involving creation of fictitious identities, bogus
PANs and TANs, forged documents and operation of multiple bank accounts for the
purpose of claiming and siphoning off income tax refunds.
Investigation
by the Income Tax Department and CBI revealed that several bank accounts were
opened using falsified credentials, many of which were directly linked to the
Respondent, CA Kapil Kansal (M. No. 540411). Handwriting analysis, KYC
documents, photographs, email trails and IP addresses used for e-filing
established his direct involvement. Refund amounts credited to these fictitious
accounts were subsequently transferred to accounts belonging to the Respondent,
his firm and family members. The fraud was estimated to have caused a loss of
approximately ₹4.83 crore to the Government exchequer. The Respondent was
arrested on 09.02.2016 and, during criminal proceedings, agreed before the
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi, to repay ₹1.30 crore in instalments, out
of which ₹20.35 lakh was deposited by November 2016.
Issues Involved
Whether
the Respondent’s involvement in orchestrating a large-scale income tax refund
fraud constituted “other misconduct” under Item (2) of Part IV of the First
Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949, and whether disciplinary
action under Section 21A(3) was warranted notwithstanding pendency of criminal
proceedings.
Petitioner’s Arguments
The
Respondent contended that disciplinary proceedings were not legally sustainable
merely on the basis of arrest and that the FIRs registered against him were
false and pending adjudication. He argued that the alleged acts occurred prior
to his enrolment as a Chartered Accountant and therefore fell outside the
jurisdiction of ICAI. He also relied on a forensic report to contend that
signatures on certain bank documents were not his and submitted that any
monetary settlement with the Income Tax Department was made under coercion
while he was in custody.
Respondent’s Arguments
The
Complainant Department relied upon extensive documentary evidence including
investigation reports, bank records, KYC documents, photographs, digital
trails, statements of witnesses and the Respondent’s own statement before the
criminal court agreeing to repay the defrauded amount. It was contended that
the fraudulent activities continued after the Respondent became a member of
ICAI and that professional misconduct proceedings are independent of criminal
trials.
Court Order / Findings
The
Board of Discipline examined the entire material on record and noted that the
Respondent became a member of the Institute on 18.01.2016 and was arrested
thereafter on 09.02.2016. The Board observed that the forensic report relied
upon by the Respondent was inconclusive and did not exonerate him, and that
photographs of the Respondent appeared on KYC documents of fictitious bank
accounts used for routing fraudulent refunds. The Board further noted the
Respondent’s voluntary statement before the criminal court agreeing to repay
₹1.30 crore to the Income Tax Department.
The
Board held that pendency of criminal proceedings does not bar disciplinary
action and that involvement in financial fraud, creation of fake identities and
misuse of tax refund mechanisms gravely undermines the integrity and reputation
of the profession. On cumulative evaluation of facts, documents and conduct of
the Respondent, the Board concluded that the Respondent was guilty of “other
misconduct” under Item (2) of Part IV of the First Schedule to the Chartered
Accountants Act, 1949 read with Section 22.
Important Clarification
The
Board clarified that Chartered Accountants are expected to maintain the highest
standards of integrity and probity. Any involvement in, association with, or
facilitation of financial fraud is incompatible with the dignity of the
profession, and disciplinary jurisdiction of ICAI is independent of and not
contingent upon the outcome of criminal proceedings.
Final Outcome
The
Board of Discipline, in exercise of powers under Section 21A(3) of the
Chartered Accountants Act, 1949, ordered removal of the name of CA Kapil
Kansal (M. No. 540411) from the Register of Members for a period of three (3)
months.
Source Link- https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1768891065_ShriArvindKumarJodhpurvsCA.Kapil.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared
strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should
independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended
to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the
organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The
material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment