ADVOCATE VS CA

AUDIT PURPOSE MEANS VAT AUDIT WHERE CONCERNED ADVOCATES HAVE DEEP KNOWLEDGE OF VAT DUE TO REGULER PRACTICE AND VAT AUDIT CERTFCATE ISSUED BY ADVOCATES SERVE THE PURPOSE.

As it is our right to recognise as VAT AUDITOR but unfortunately while implementing VAT in the State Of Maharashtra there was provision in this regard but when act passed by legislature it could not find the place thereafter after Mumbai High Court & Hon'ble Supreme Court judgement, Advocates are not eligible for vat audit

As we are advocates brings to this notice to the bar council of India to resolve the issue with CAI.

As i am an Advocate paracticing taxation for last 8 years. in Karnataka VAT Act an Tax practioner who is regitered and practiced for minimum 3 years can audit the books under VAT Act.

Advocates having better knowledge in the field of Vat in comparison to any other class of professional but it is very unfotunately that  the BAR COUNSIL OF INDIA not protect the rights of the advocates in the field of taxation.

Government of Maharashtra is adopting discriminate attitude by not allowing Advocates for VAT Audit. As it is the accepted fact that Advocates are deeply involved in the practise of Sales Tax Laws. They have deep knowledge in the sales Tax and they can more effectively do the VAT Audit Work than CA's.When other sates are allowing the advocates for VAT Audit what is the problem of Maharashtra Govt. Since our Capital is Mumbai and CA's are powerful authority there, this could be only reason for not allowing Advocates otherwisw there is no reason.We request Bar council of India to represent this matter with govt of Maharashtra so that there eligible members should get there Rights which was abducted by other institute in the influnce of power and weak political Will.If The experince of Last three years of VAT Audit would be considered, the Advocates would get the Right in no time.All the Advocates are requested to email the matter to Commissioner of Sales Tax and Finance Minister so that they can realise ther mistake at earliast.

Adv. Shailesh D. Jain

Civil Lines Hanuman Chowk Gondia.

Email. shaileshjain2k@yahoo.com

Moblie- 09370286778 

see what is the practical difficulty in practising in the field of taxation Advocates doesnt know about facts and accounts we have no time to looks in to the filling procedures so we are in position to depend the CA

as my concern ,the advocates---most of them are not ready to update the knowledge,and not ready to bring sophistication in their practice.Mean while most of the advocates are slow runners than CA's and CS's.

as my concern ,the advocates---most of them are not ready to update the knowledge,and not ready to bring sophistication in their practice.Mean while most of the advocates are slow runners than CA's and CS's.

as my concern ,the advocates---most of them are not ready to update the knowledge,and not ready to bring sophistication in their practice.Mean while most of the advocates are slow runners than CA's and CS's.

The matter is most concerned.  I understood that in almost all states in India, VAT audits are conducted by CA. In some state,  there is provision in VAT Act permitting registered Tax Practioners  to conduct audit and to certify  to a certain limit like 40 Lakhs or below or some other Turnover.  In almost all states, including Kerala and Tamilnadu CA auditing is complussoery when Turnover is exeed Rs.40 lakkhs (from this year 60 lakhs).  It is heard that auditing is not compulssory in Andra Pradesh. 

It is most important to note that, in  VAT  Act, there is provision for penalising CA  when he do not perform his duty correctly.  I have occassion to see a penalty order issued to a CA for Rs.27 Lakhs by an Intelligence Officer as co-obligator while he failed to report the discount aspects in the VAT form.  When the CA filed WP before the  Hon. High Court he got only interim stay for one month.  The CA was freed only when the Assessee paid compounding fee and settled the issue. What I mean is that when auditing is conducted, the Advocate must be cautious and as commented by a few, liberal views will certainly create risks.

Anyway, there is no bar to permit advocates for auditing for the purpose of VAT laws.

Rema (commenting due to its present importance)

The auditing is a specialised job and can be performed by a Chartered accountant. the auditing should be left with CAs. However the following point I want to emphesize:

When a Chartered Accountant is performing a statutory audit, he is acting on behalf of the revenue department. Many times, we have seen that the dealers’/assessee’s assessment has been made on the basis of the auditors’ report. It is very well settled doctrine of the law that in any given case, one person can not be the solicitor for both the parties.

The statutory mandate of auditing under Income Tax Act or VAT Acts have been provided to facilitate the assessment proceedings and help the authorities i the assessment proceedings.

Now, when a CA is performing the statutory audit (which may be presumed as acting for the revenue ); then how can he defend the assessee for his own cause and act?

For example: 

if there is violation of section 269SS or 269T of IT Act the auditor is duty bound to the revenue to state the same in the audit report. Later on in the assessment proceedings the same auditor if tries to justify the violation on behalf of the assessee it would amount to soliciting both for the revenue and the assessee.

That C.A should not be allowed to represent those dealers/assessees in the assessment proceedings of whose accounts he has done statutory audit under Income Tax Act or VAT Act. A different C.A or an advocate should be allowed to represent the assessee/dealer in such cases.

Why this debate???

Are the Ld Lawyer fraternity getting scared of specialisits in a particular field of finance, accounting and taxation?

My dear sir(s), the canvas of law is much larger than taxation. The reach of CAs ends at Tribunal and in higher courts it is only lawyer who pleads the case to resolve question of law.

There are strict regulations for CAs for training and updation of their knowledge. To my understanding there is no stipulation for lawyers to earn yearly CPAs or learning points to continue with their registration. How many lwyers have practical knowledge of law, pleading etc before they register with respective Bar Councils. How many lawyer's can claim to be proficient in accountancy, accounting standards, IFRS etc.

Sir(s), CAs by training are exposed to audit jobs and the same should be left to them. There are previlages in each profession. Who can stand in a court of law except lawyers. The Lawyers are considered to be officers of court and their Vakalatnama is sufficient to represent the client before judicial authorities.

I do agree with Mr Amit that the auditor and authorised representative should be different otherwise vested interest creep in and then a "SATYAM' happens.

Yes I agree with Mr Vineet the debate Advocate Vs CA should not arise. CA and advocacy are totaly different professions. The scope of Advocacy is much more wider than that of CA. But the standard of a studies and training which a C.A. student goes through is much more higher than that of Legal studies in India. The bar Council and the government should raise the standard of legal studies and it should be made equivalent to international standards. Today I feel doing LL.B is just like a piece of cake for any graduate.