12 Dec 2019

Chartered Accountants joining Unrecognized ‘Networks’ for Professional Work will be subject to Disciplinary Proceedings

by | posted in: Accounting Standards, Audit, Due Diligence, Corporate & Business Advisory Services, Corporate Updates, Economy, Business Updates, Corporate Affairs | 0
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) today clarified that, Chartered Accountants joining Unrecognized ‘Networks’ for Professional Work amounts may result in Disciplinary Proceedings.
The ICAI has said that, It has come to the knowledge of the Institute that many members in practice are joining/associating themselves with “Networks” which are other than the Networks registered with the Institute, with the mutual referral of professional work being the main objective of such Networks, among others.
The ICAI has clarified that associations with ‘Network’ as a medium of referral of professional work is permissible only if the Network is registered with the Institute, comprising only of Chartered Accountants/ Chartered Accountant Firms, and governed by the Institute’s Network Guidelines,‟ attention is also drawn towards following provisions of Chartered Accountants Act, 1949:
Clause (2) of Part I of First Schedule to the Act
A Chartered Accountant in practice shall be deemed to be guilty of professional misconduct, if he pays or allows or agrees to pay or allow, directly or indirectly, any share, commission or brokerage in the Fees or profits of his professional business, to any person other than a member of the Institute or a partner or a retired partner or the legal representative of a deceased partner, or a member of any other professional body or with such other persons having such qualifications as may be prescribed, for the purpose of rendering such professional services from time to time in or outside India.
Explanation — In this item, “partner” includes a person residing outside India with whom a chartered accountant in practice has entered into a partnership which is not in contravention of the item (4) of this Part;
Clause (3) of Part I of First Schedule to the Act
A Chartered Accountant in practice shall be deemed to be guilty of professional misconduct, if he accepts or agrees to accept any part of the profits of the professional work of a person who is not a member of the Institute: Provided that nothing herein contained shall be construed as prohibiting a member from entering into profit sharing or other similar arrangements, including receiving any share commission or brokerage in the fees, with a member of such professional body or other person having qualifications, as is referred to in item (2) of this Part;
Clause (5) of Part I of First Schedule to the Act
A Chartered Accountant in practice shall be deemed to be guilty of professional misconduct, if he secures, either through the services of a person who is not an employee of such Chartered Accountant or who is not his partner or by means which are not open to a chartered accountant, any professional business. Provided that nothing herein contained shall be construed as prohibiting any arrangement permitted in terms of items (2), (3) and (4) of this Part;
Clause (6) of Part I of First Schedule to the Act
A Chartered Accountant in practice shall be deemed to be guilty of professional misconduct if he solicits clients or professional work either directly or indirectly by circular, advertisement, personal communication or interview or by any other means: Provided that nothing herein contained shall be construed as preventing or prohibiting – (i) any chartered accountant from applying or requesting for or inviting or securing professional work from another chartered accountant in practice; or
(ii) a member from responding to tenders or enquiries issued by various users of professional services or organisations from time to time and securing professional work as a consequence;
In view of the above provisions, it is not permissible for members in practice to join Networks (by whatever name called) other than the Networks registered with the Institute.
Members may note that joining such Networks as mentioned above may result in noncompliance of the above-stated provisions of the Act resulting in disciplinary proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

REVISED GUIDELINES OF NETWORK

4 Dec 2019

SEBI action against auditors not ‘turf war’: Ajay Tyagi

by | posted in: Accounting Standards, Audit, Due Diligence, Company Incorporations, e-filing of MCA Returns, Corporate & Business Advisory Services, Corporate Updates, Economy, Business Updates, Corporate Affairs | 0
Capital markets regulator Sebi on Wednesday said its actions against auditors for faulty audits are within its “Parliamentary mandate”, and there is no question of “turf wars” on this issue.
SEBI Chairman Ajay Tyagi said the watchdog is working only to protect the interests of investors and limiting its actions to auditors of publicly listed firms.

In 2018, the regulator banned Price Waterhouse for two years from auditing any listed firm for its role in the Satyam Computer Services scam. However, the audit firm had successfully challenged the same in the Securities Appellate Tribunal and got the order quashed.

“It is our parliamentary mandate I would say to see that it is done and there is no trouble there. It goes to the basic issue of investor protection being the parliamentary mandate of Sebi,” he noted.

In November, the Supreme Court stayed a SAT order which had held that Sebi does not have the power to bar auditors.

“Our position is very simple — if they’re auditing listed companies based on which investors are investing, and if we find that that work has not been done properly and in investors’ interest, some audit firms should not be allowed to audit for sometime of the listed companies,” Tyagi said at an event here.

According to Tyagi, audit firms are important gatekeepers who help companies put out results and financial performance to the stock exchanges, based on which investors take the call whether to invest or not.

“It is not our case that Sebi is the agency which registers or regulates the auditors. It is nothing like that… We are not de-registering auditors. We don’t have the authority and we don’t wish to have that authority,” he said.

He also made it clear that Sebi’s expectation is that faulty audits should not lead to inflated profits or dividends.

Regarding IPO market, Tyagi said there has been an improvement in activities lately and that nearly a dozen issues of over Rs 15,000 crore are in the pipeline.

The regulator has given its wish-list for the budget to the finance ministry, includes ways to increase the activities in the corporate bond market, he said.

3 Dec 2019

MCA amends threshold limits for Related Party Transactions.

by | posted in: Accounting Standards, Audit, Due Diligence, Company Incorporations, e-filing of MCA Returns, Corporate & Business Advisory Services, Corporate Updates, Economy, Business Updates, Corporate Affairs | 0
On November 18, 2019 the Companies (Meetings of Board and its Powers) Second Amendment Rules, 2019 (“Amendment Rules“) amended certain threshold limits prescribed by the Rules.

The central government notified the Companies (Meetings of Board and its Powers) Second Amendment Rules, 2019 on 18 November 2019. The amendment rules amend sub-clause 3 of rule 15 of the Companies (Meetings of Board and its Powers) Rules, 2014. The amendment rules alter the various transaction thresholds within which the board may authorize a related party transaction without referring the matter to the shareholders pursuant to section 188(1) (Related party transactions) of the Companies Act, 2013.

Rule 15 provides for conditions applicable to the board taking up, discussing and approving a related party contract or arrangement. The first proviso to section 188(1) of the act provides that no contract or arrangement which exceeds certain monetary thresholds, in relation to the company’s paid-up share capital or otherwise, may be entered into without the prior approval of the shareholders by a resolution. The thresholds in relation to this proviso to section 188(1) of the act are prescribed by the rules and have been amended through the amendment rules as follows:

  • For a contract or arrangement in relation to a sale, purchase or supply of any goods, previously the threshold, was the lower of: (1) 10% or more of the turnover of the company; or (2)₹1 billion. The amendment rules have relaxed the threshold and fixed it at 10% or more of turnover of the company.
  • Similarly, for a contract or arrangement for selling or otherwise disposing of, or buying property of any kind, previously the threshold for requiring a shareholder resolution was the lower of: (1) 10% or more of the turnover of the company; or (2)₹1 billion. The amendment rules have relaxed the threshold and fixed it at 10% or more of turnover of the company.
  • The amendment rules has similarly amended the threshold for a contract or arrangement in relation to leasing of property any kind, and in relation to availing or rendering of any services (directly, or through the appointment of an agent). The amendment rules now fix the threshold at 10% or more of turnover of the company.

Accordingly, the ministry has relaxed the thresholds and made it simpler for companies to ensure ease of business, and the ease of entering into related party transactions.

 Nature of Related Party Transactions Earlier Threshold Limit* Amended Threshold Limit*
Sale, purchase or supply
of any goods or material (directly or through an agent).		 Amounting to ten percent (10%) or more of turnover or Rs. 100 Crore, whichever is lower. Amounting to ten percent (10%) or more of the turnover of the company.
Selling or otherwise
disposing of, or buying, property of any kind (directly or through an agent).		 Amounting to ten percent (10%) or more of net worth or Rs. 100 Crore, whichever is lower. Amounting to ten percent (10%) or more of the turnover of the company.
Leasing of property of
any kind.		 Amounting to ten percent (10%) or more of net worth or 10 percent (10%) or more of turnover Rs. 100 Crore, whichever is lower. Amounting to ten percent (10%) or more of the turnover of the company.
Availing or rendering of any services (directly or through an agent) Amounting to ten percent(10%)or more of turnover or Rs. 50 Crore, whichever is lower Amounting to ten percent (10%) or more of the turnover of the company
*limits specified above shall apply for transaction or transactions to be entered into either individually or taken together with the previous transactions during a financial year.
Appointment to any
office or place of profit in the company, subsidiary company or associate company		 Remuneration exceeding
Rs. 2,50,000 per month		 No Change
Underwriting the
subscription of any securities or derivatives of the company		 Remuneration exceeding
one percent (1%) of net worth		 No Change
28 Nov 2019

Insolvency regime for personal guarantors to corporate debtors from December 1

by | posted in: Accounting Standards, Audit, Due Diligence, Company Incorporations, e-filing of MCA Returns, Corporate & Business Advisory Services, Corporate Updates, Economy, Business Updates, Corporate Affairs | 0
The provisions for resolution for individuals under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) is being implemented in a phased manner. On Friday, the corporate affairs ministry said the provision pertaining to personal guarantors to corporate debtors will be in force from December 1
A case is taken up for resolution under the law only after approval from the National Company Law Tribunal.

The insolvency regime for individual guarantors to corporate debtors will be in force from December 1, according to the government.

The provisions for resolution for individuals under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) is being implemented in a phased manner.

On Friday, the corporate affairs ministry said the provision pertaining to personal guarantors to corporate debtors would come into force from December 1.

The Code provides for a market-driven and time-bound resolution for stressed assets.

A case is taken up for resolution under the law only after approval from the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT).

In October, Corporate Affairs Secretary Injeti Srinivas said personal insolvency regime would be fully operational in one year.

“In the first phase, personal guarantor to a corporate debtor is almost under commencement. The next would be the fresh start process, basically giving relief to very small borrowers who are not in a position to repay the debt. That may be in another four to six months. Then proprietorship and partnership and others,” he had said.

Source : Economic Times

8 Oct 2019

MCA plans to amend CA Act to remove conflict of interest in audits

by | posted in: Accounting Standards, Audit, Due Diligence, Company Incorporations, e-filing of MCA Returns, Corporate Updates, Economy, Business Updates, Corporate Affairs | 0
The government, in creating disciplinary mechanisms, could consider bringing in disclosure norms for auditors with respect to non-audit services and fees charged by them

The Ministry of Corporate Affairs is planning to amend the Chartered Accountants Act to build disciplinary mechanisms for removing possible conflicts of interest between audit firms and companies they audit.

The government is also looking at ways to address the gaps in the law with respect to network entities of which audit firms are part.

“We need to strengthen the Chartered Accountants Act. Many entities need to be brought within the regulatory remit to create accountability and transparency,” a senior government official told Business Standard.

 

 

The government, in creating disciplinary mechanisms, could consider bringing in disclosure norms for auditor with respect to non-audit services and fees charged by them

 

Source:  Business Standard

12 Jul 2019

Government mulls ceiling for audit firms amid crack down on lapses

by | posted in: Accounting Standards, Audit, Due Diligence, Company Incorporations, e-filing of MCA Returns, Corporate & Business Advisory Services, Corporate Updates, Economy, Business Updates, Corporate Affairs | 0

Governance lapses, negligence has loaded the banks with one of the world’s worst piles of bad debt.
A government-appointed panel on regulating auditors and the networks had suggested that the fee from non-audit services should not be more than 50% of the audit fee.

India is considering tougher rules for audit firms, including a cap on the number of listed companies they can examine, according to a person with knowledge of the matter, as the government seeks to tighten oversight after a recent spate of governance lapses.

In India, 70% of the about 1,800 companies that trade on the National Stock Exchange are audited by firms affiliated to EY, Deloitte & Touche, KPMG and PWC, according to Delhi-based Prime Database. Current rules stipulate that individual auditors can examine accounts of up to 20 companies, though there is no limit on number of audits for the company.

The Big Four in India operate through a network of local chartered accountants firms. One way for them is to partner as a member of a local firm. They can also allow their brand name to be used by sub-licensee of a member local firm. The ministry hasn’t decided if the cap on audits will be at the group level or on each member firm, the person said.

The government is planning to expand the list of services which can’t be offered by statutory auditors under the Companies Act. Currently, statutory auditors can’t offer nine services, directly or indirectly, including internal audit, investment banking, and actuarial services. There is no restriction on providing services such as taxation or restructuring and valuation.

One option is to tweak the present cap on fees that can be generated through offering non-audit services, the person said. This cap, fixed in 2002, says fees from non-audit work can’t be more than the aggregate statutory audit fees. A spokeswoman for the corporate affairs ministry declined to comment.

A government-appointed panel on regulating auditors and the networks had suggested that the fee from non-audit services should not be more than 50% of the audit fee.

Deloitte Ban
Governance lapses and negligence has loaded the nation’s banks with one of the world’s worst piles of bad debt. In some cases, allegations of fund diversion have surfaced, while the founders of some shadow banks have faced accusations of accepting kickbacks in exchange for loans.

The corporate affairs ministry earlier this month sought a ban on Deloitte Haskins & Sells and BSR & Co. for their role as auditors to IL&FS Financial Services, a part of the IL&FS Group that was seized by the government last year after a string of debt defaults.

Deloitte in an emailed statement said it’s fully compliant with Indian audit standards, while BSR said it would defend its position in accordance with the law.

Meanwhile, the banking regulator forbid EY affiliate S. R. Batliboi & Co. from taking on bank audits for a year and, in 2018, the markets watchdog banned the local unit of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP for two years in relations to work from a decade earlier.

Source: Economic Times

28 Jun 2019

Clarification on Auditor’s Certificate on Return of Deposits-DPT-3

by | posted in: Accounting Standards, Audit, Due Diligence, Company Incorporations, e-filing of MCA Returns, Corporate & Business Advisory Services, Corporate Updates, Economy, Business Updates, Corporate Affairs | 0

 

Clarification on Auditor’s Certificate on Return of Deposits pursuant to Rule 16 of the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 2014

This has reference to Rule 16 of the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 2014 and further amendments.

In this regard, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs vide its letter no. File No: P-01/08/2013- CL-V Vol. VI dated June 24, 2019 has clarified on the matter as under:

  • The Auditor’s Certificate is mandatory only in case of return of deposits.
  • For filing particulars of transactions not considered as deposits information contained therein as on 31st March of that year need not be from the duly audited Financial Statement.
  • Only in case of Return of Deposit information contained therein as on 31st March of that year should be from duly audited financial statement of the company.

Return of Deposits

Also in order to provide guidance to members, the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board of ICAI has issued Illustrative Auditor’s Certificate on Return of Deposits, which is available on the below cited link:

Illustrative Auditor’s Certificate on Return of Deposits as at [state the year end] pursuant to Rule 16 of the Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 2014, as amended

(Chairman & Vice Chairman, Auditing and Assurance Standards Board)

June, 26th 2019