Facts of the Case

A complaint was filed by Mr. Raj Kumar Agarwal alleging professional misconduct against CA Rahul Agarwal in relation to alleged hacking and misuse of Income Tax e-filing credentials. The complainant alleged that his Income Tax portal account was hacked in May 2015 and that the Respondent, in connivance with others, accessed his e-filing account, changed credentials, received OTPs on alternate email and mobile numbers, and misused the account for filing returns and related purposes.

It was alleged that the Respondent had access to the complainant’s credentials due to past professional association and that changes to the registered email ID and mobile number were made without authorisation. The complainant relied upon police complaints, cyber crime records, FIRs and assertions that the Respondent was “hand-in-gloves” with other family members amid matrimonial and family disputes.

The Respondent denied the allegations and contended that the dispute was purely personal and familial in nature, that he never acted as the complainant’s Chartered Accountant in the relevant period, and that there was no evidence of his involvement in any hacking or misuse of credentials.

Issues Involved

Whether the Respondent hacked or misused the complainant’s Income Tax e-filing account or facilitated such acts, and whether the allegations, if proved, constituted “Other Misconduct” under Item (2) of Part IV of the First Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949.

Petitioner’s Arguments

The complainant alleged unauthorised access to the Income Tax portal, misuse of email IDs and mobile numbers for OTPs, filing of returns without consent, and collusion between the Respondent and other family members. It was contended that such acts amounted to serious professional misconduct involving cyber crime and abuse of professional position.

Respondent’s Arguments

The Respondent denied all allegations and submitted that he never acted as the complainant’s Chartered Accountant, never possessed or used the complainant’s credentials, and had no role in any alleged hacking. He contended that the complaint arose out of long-standing family and matrimonial disputes and that the allegations were speculative and unsupported by technical or documentary evidence directly linking him to the alleged acts. The Respondent also objected to procedural aspects including summoning of witnesses and reliance on criminal allegations without proof.

Court / Authority Order and Findings

The Board of Discipline examined the voluminous record including the charge sheet, police and cyber crime documents, statements, timelines, email and mobile records, and submissions of the parties. The Board observed that allegations of hacking were serious in nature but required strict proof establishing direct involvement of the Respondent.

The Board noted that multiple cyber crime and police proceedings were pending or had been initiated, but none conclusively established that the Respondent hacked or accessed the complainant’s e-filing account. The Board further observed that the complainant failed to demonstrate that the Respondent was acting in the capacity of a Chartered Accountant or that any professional relationship existed during the relevant period.

The Board also took note of the background of family disputes, matrimonial litigation and multiple complaints between related parties, and held that the material on record did not establish professional misconduct attributable to the Respondent. The Board concluded that suspicion, conjecture and pendency of criminal allegations cannot substitute proof in disciplinary proceedings.

Important Clarification

The Board clarified that allegations of cyber crime or hacking against a Chartered Accountant must be supported by clear, cogent and direct evidence establishing the member’s involvement and professional nexus. Personal disputes and parallel criminal proceedings, without proof of professional misconduct, do not warrant disciplinary action under the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949.

Final Outcome

The ICAI Board of Discipline held CA Rahul Agarwal (M. No. 301783) 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 October 2022, 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/1768898763_Mr.RajKumarAgarwalvsCA.RahulAgarwalM.No.301783DistrictDarjeeling.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.