CA wasn’t guilty of professional misconduct if he unilaterally revised his audit report to rectify a mistake

Section 22, read with section 21, of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 - Professional or other misconduct defined - Respondent chartered accountant was auditor of a Club - Respondent signed audit report but before it was placed in Annual General Body Meeting, respondent noticed some discrepancy in closing stock and revised that audit report - On complaint, Council held respondent guilty of gross misconduct under section 22 - Council found respondent guilty of misconduct in not mentioning audit report as revised audit report - Whether it was permissible for respondent to rectify and revise audit report even after it was submitted - Held, yes - Whether conduct of respondent in not specifically mentioning audit report as a revised report would fall within parameters of misconduct as understood in terms of section 22 read with clause 7 of II Schedule of Act - Held, no - Whether since respondent had acted in bona fide manner by rectifying his mistakes, conduct of respondent could not be said to be negligent and, thus, complaint was to be dismissed - Held, yes [Paras 13, 17, 19 & 22]

Refer:[2014] 44 taxmann.com 6 (Andhra Pradesh)
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
v.
G. Pattabhi Rama Charya