No prohibition to entertain a complaint against Chartered Accountant at instance of spouse

There is no prohibition to entertain a complaint at the instance of spouse of a CA for the reason that it relates to a family dispute – High Court 

In a recent judgment, Hon’ble High Court has held under ICAI Regulations that there is no prohibition to entertain a complaint at the instance of spouse of the Chartered Accountant, if it discloses professional misconduct.

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
5114 (2026) (04) abacus.in HC

In the first round of litigation, the Petitioner challenged the communication of the Institute of Chartered Accountant of India (ICAI) rejecting the complaint filed by him against a Chartered Accountant under Section 21 of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949.

The Board of Discipline of ICAI was of a prima facie opinion that the respondent CA was guilty of other misconduct falling within the meaning of Clause 2 Part IV of the First Schedule of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 read with Section 22 of the said Act.

However, the said communication from the Board of Discipline of ICAI (the Board) stated that the subject matter of the complaint was relating to family dispute and the Respondent had been made by a party to such disputes. Therefore, the Board did not agree with the Prima Facie Opinion of the Director that the Respondent CA was guilty of Other Misconduct. The Board accordingly passed an order for closure of the aforesaid Complaint.

The Hon’ble High Court observed that the Board had not assigned any reason for arriving at such a conclusion and, therefore, the petitioner was right in contending that the reasons which are the heart and soul of any decision, were missing in the instant case.

The Hon’ble High Court disposed of the Petition directing ICAI to furnish the reasons for its decision in terms of the said communication.

In compliance of the direction of the Hon’ble High Court, the Board furnished reasons for its decision. However, except reiterating the previous communication, no cogent reasons were furnished.

Aggrieved, the Petitioner again approached the Hon’ble High Court and assailed the Order passed by the Board, disagreeing with the prima facie opinion of the Director (Discipline) without furnishing reasons.

The solitary grievance of the petitioner was that if the Institute of Chartered Accountant of India was in disagreement with the prima facie opinion of the Director, the reasons for the same must have been assigned.   

On The contrary, the ICAI opposed the Petitioner and submitted that there was no fiduciary relationship between the petitioner and the Chartered Accountant, and therefore, there could be no misconduct on his part. It was further stated that the petitioner held a personal grudge against the Chartered Accountant and had, therefore, filed a frivolous complaint against him. 

The Hon’ble High Court however observed that the prima facie opinion of the Director unequivocally recorded certain inconsistencies and deviations on the part of the CA. The counsel appearing for the CA was unable to refute the detailed findings made out in the prima facie opinion of the Director, including that the accused CA accessed the personal information of the petitioner without his consent.

The Hon’ble High Court further observed that the counsel of the CA had submitted that the CA did not file income tax return for two years and he did not render any professional services to the Petitioner. Therefore, there was no reason to entertain the petitioner’s complaint.

The Hon’ble High Court noted that there was no reason, whatsoever, assigned in the impugned order/communication. It only stated that the complaint related to a family dispute. The Board should have given clear reasons as to why the opinion given by the Director is not acceptable.

The Hon’ble High Court stated that there is no such prohibition to entertain a complaint at the instance of spouse, if it discloses professional misconduct. The complaint must have been taken to its logical conclusion by assigning appropriate reasons which had not been done in the instant case. The only reason that the complaint was related to a family dispute cannot be countenanced, when the allegations are made against the Chartered Accountant for violation of statutory norms. 

Accordingly, the impugned minutes of meeting of the Board were set aside. The matter was remitted back to the said Board for deciding afresh in accordance with law.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

• Penalty u/s 271B for unfilled column 40 in Tax Audit Report Form 3CD deleted by ITAT
• Merely ex-parte rectifying computation without amending assessment order not make it nullity- ITAT
• Once assessee discharges primary onus, it shifts to AO to bring evidence to contrary – ITAT
• Cost Inflation Index for FY/Tax Year 2026-27 notified by CBDT. See Up-to-date Table of CII
• Power of CIT(A) u/s 251(1)(a) to remand case can be exercised only in best judgment assessment