Facts of the
Case
A complaint was filed by Ms. K. S. Aruna Vasumathi
alleging professional misconduct against CA R. Seshadri. The complainant had
earlier worked with M/s Infosys Technologies Pvt. Ltd. and later faced
difficulties in accessing her Income Tax e-filing account. Upon eventually
regaining access, she discovered that her primary and secondary contact
details, including mobile number and email ID, had been changed without her
consent.
The complainant alleged that unauthorized access to
her Income Tax account was gained through the Respondent’s office
infrastructure and that such access enabled retrieval of her PAN and password,
which were later used in matrimonial litigation pending before the Sub-Court,
Tambaram. A complaint was lodged with the Cyber Crime Cell, Chennai City, and
an FIR was registered in 2018. Allegations were raised that the Respondent,
practicing as a Chartered Accountant, connived in or facilitated illegal access
to the complainant’s Income Tax account.
Issues
Involved
Whether the Respondent was involved in or
responsible for unauthorized access to the complainant’s Income Tax e-filing
account, whether such access was gained using the Respondent’s office
infrastructure with his knowledge or consent, and whether such conduct
constituted “Other Misconduct” under Item (2) of Part IV of the First Schedule
to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949.
Complainant’s
Arguments
The complainant alleged that illegal access to her
Income Tax account could not have occurred without involvement of the
Respondent, as the breach allegedly originated from his office systems. It was
contended that as the owner of the office, the Respondent was responsible for
acts committed using his office infrastructure. The complainant further argued
that affidavits produced by third parties admitting misuse were obtained under
coercion and could not absolve the Respondent of responsibility.
Respondent’s
Arguments
The Respondent denied all allegations and submitted
that he had no knowledge of, or involvement in, unauthorized access to the complainant’s
Income Tax account. He explained that one Mr. D. Ranganathan, accountant of M/s
Covai Seenu & Company and acquaintance of the complainant’s husband,
misused the “forgot password” facility on the Income Tax portal using the
complainant’s PAN card details without the Respondent’s knowledge.
The Respondent produced notarised affidavits of Mr.
D. Ranganathan, Mr. J. Ravi Kumar and Mr. M. Venkateswaran,
who took full responsibility for the unauthorized act and categorically stated
that the Respondent and his staff had no role in the incident. The Respondent
further produced police investigation records, Cyber Crime Cell reports, and
the order of the Hon’ble Madras High Court discharging him from criminal
proceedings.
Court /
Authority Order and Findings
The Board of Discipline examined the entire record
including affidavits of the concerned individuals, police investigation
reports, Cyber Crime Cell findings, High Court orders and submissions of the
parties. The Board observed that the affidavits clearly established that
unauthorized access to the complainant’s Income Tax account was carried out by
Mr. D. Ranganathan using PAN details supplied by the complainant’s husband,
without the knowledge or consent of the Respondent.
The Board noted that the Respondent maintained
multiple official email IDs for client communication and that misuse of one
such system by a third party, without authorization, could not automatically be
attributed to the Respondent. The Board further observed that there was no evidence
to show that the Respondent personally accessed the complainant’s account,
altered login credentials, or directed any person to do so.
The Board also took note of the Hon’ble Madras High
Court’s order discharging the Respondent from criminal proceedings, wherein it
was held that downloading Income Tax details for use in court proceedings,
though questionable, did not amount to fraud or dishonest intention
attributable to the Respondent.
On appreciation of evidence, the Board concluded
that there was no direct or circumstantial evidence to establish involvement,
consent or connivance of the Respondent in the alleged unauthorized access.
Important
Clarification
The Board clarified that disciplinary liability of
a Chartered Accountant cannot be fastened merely because misuse of digital
infrastructure occurred in his office premises. Where independent affidavits,
police investigations and judicial orders establish that unauthorized acts were
committed by third parties without the member’s knowledge, professional
misconduct cannot be inferred.
Final
Outcome
The ICAI Board of Discipline held CA R. Seshadri
(M. No. 205989) 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 10 February 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/1768898804_Ms.K.S.ArunaVasumathiChennaivsCA.R.SeshadriM.No.205989Coimbatore.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