Facts of the Case
Disciplinary
proceedings were initiated In Re: CA Adesh Kumar Jain on the basis of
information received from the Informant Department relating to a CBI case
RC2172012A0005, registered in connection with alleged income tax evasion
and bribery involving officers of the Income Tax Department and officials of M/s
Eldeco Group of Companies.
The
investigation stemmed from a search and survey conducted by the Income Tax
Department in March 2012 against Eldeco Group. During subsequent CBI
investigation, statements were recorded alleging that the Respondent had been
projected as a “specialist” who could assist in settling income tax matters. It
was alleged that the Respondent demanded illegal gratification to influence
Income Tax officials.
However,
the Respondent was not named as an accused or witness in the CBI charge
sheet dated 29 December 2012, and criminal proceedings were pending against
other accused persons, with trial stayed by orders of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court.
Issues Involved
Whether
the Respondent acted in collusion with Income Tax officials or intermediaries
to facilitate bribery or illegal settlement of income tax matters, and whether
such alleged conduct constituted “Other Misconduct” under Item (2) of Part
IV of the First Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949.
Informant Department’s Case
The
Informant Department relied upon the CBI charge sheet and statements recorded
during investigation to suggest that the Respondent acted as a consultant who
allegedly offered to settle income tax matters through illegal means. It was
alleged that the Respondent acted in collusion with accused public servants to
receive bribes on their behalf.
Respondent’s Arguments
The
Respondent denied all allegations and submitted that he never offered to settle
income tax matters through bribery and never met the concerned company
officials except on a single professional interaction arranged by a colleague.
He categorically stated that he had no professional or personal relationship
with Eldeco Group or its directors.
The
Respondent filed a notarised affidavit stating that he was not involved in any
illegal activity, had not offered any “deal”, and had not received or demanded
any illegal gratification. He further submitted that he was neither arrayed as
an accused nor cited as a witness in the CBI charge sheet and had never
received any notice, summons or communication from any court or investigative
authority.
Court Order / Findings
The
ICAI Board of Discipline examined the CBI charge sheet, correspondence from the
Informant Department, affidavits filed by the Respondent, and the procedural
history of the criminal case.
The
Board observed that the sole evidence relied upon by the Informant
Department was the charge sheet, in which the Respondent was neither
named as an accused nor as a witness. The Board further noted that no
independent documentary or oral evidence was produced to substantiate the
allegation that the Respondent acted as an intermediary or demanded bribes.
The
Board also took note that criminal proceedings were still pending against other
accused persons and that no finding of guilt had been recorded against the
Respondent by any court of law. In the absence of cogent, conclusive evidence
linking the Respondent to the alleged misconduct, the Board held that the
charge could not be sustained.
Important Clarification
The
Board clarified that disciplinary liability cannot be fastened merely on the
basis of allegations or third-party statements, particularly when the
member is not named in criminal proceedings and no independent evidence
establishes involvement. The burden of proof lies on the Informant Department
to substantiate allegations of “Other Misconduct”.
Final Outcome
The
ICAI Board of Discipline held CA Adesh Kumar Jain (M. No. 089016) Not Guilty
of “Other Misconduct” under Item (2) of Part IV of the First Schedule
to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 read with Section 22.
By
order dated 21 November 2023, the Board directed closure of the case
under Rule 15(2) of the Chartered Accountants (Procedure of Investigations
of Professional and Other Misconduct and Conduct of Cases) Rules, 2007.
Source
Link- https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1768899049_CA.AdeshKumarJainM.No.089016inRe.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