Logwritten
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 2009 3:29 AM IST

New Delhi: The fraud perpetrated by Satyam Computer Services Ltd’s founder B. Ramalinga Raju has claimed some collateral damage: the apex body of accountants in the country, and its current president Uttam Prakash Agarwal.

Loading Video...

The government has, in recent weeks, tightened its control over the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (Icai) diluting Agarwal’s own powers in the process.

The move comes ahead of crucial elections to the body founded in 1949 and which regulates the functioning of at least 150,000 chartered accountants who sign off on the financial statements of companies—a sort of first line of defence against any financial misconduct by management or promoters.

Some of the government’s actions are seen by two people, an Icai council member and an official at the ministry of corporate affairs (MCA), as a reaction to Agarwal’s handling of the Satyam scandal, an allegation Agarwal denies.

Icai’s council is the institute’s core decision-making unit.

One of the charges against Agarwal is that he has been “soft” on S. Gopalakrishnan, a partner at Price Waterhouse, which audited Satyam’s books, and now in jail as his role in the Satyam scandal is investigated. “The allegation that I have gone slow on Gopalakrishnan or produced a weak report is absolute rubbish,” Agarwal said.

The most significant rule change, approved by Icai’s finance committee last week, requires all financial issues at Icai to be now cleared consensually by members of the panel, which has three government nominees. Previously, the president of Icai, the fourth member of the committee, used to take these decisions on his own without too much interference by government nominees. The fifth member of the panel is the body’s vice- president. “It has been decided that while (the) finance committee will not dig into expenditure that has been made in the past, in future, all finance-related matters of Icai will come to the finance committee; spending on infrastructure such as on Icai buildings across the country and events will also need to be cleared by the committee,” said a person familiar with the decision made by the finance committee who did not want to be identified.

This person also added that only a deviation of 20% from the proposed expenditure would be tolerated. Mint couldn’t independently ascertain whether there have been any significant infrastructural investments made by Icai in recent years and whether the projects concerned, if any, cost more than initial estimates.

The committee’s decision comes in the wake of an email sent by a government nominee on Icai’s council and Supreme Court lawyer O.P. Vaish to Agarwal on 18 August that suggested discussing the issue related to financial decisions and others at an Icai council meeting the following day. Mint has reviewed the mail, but couldn’t ascertain the status of the other points raised by Vaish.

Vaish himself couldn’t be reached for comment.

READ MORE ARTICLES BY:
 
CARAMESH Said:


The base behind the report should be disclosed?

Posted On 10/4/2009 12:07:16 AM
V Said:


This has reference to the above article and further facts about this that the high level of support by the government to this institute and best known reasons known to it. The birth of other two institutes were at different times, a delayed one, but the due recognition by the government has been denied at various levels knowingly or at the influence of the senior even though all the institutes are babies of the government, by various acts of parliaments of this great democracy. It is also a considered opinion that audit is an inspection of the accounting procedures and records by a trained accountant and it can be done any member of all the three institutes. The members of the three institutes are talent banks of the country in the field of accountancy, law and audit and every institute was enacted at different time to cope up with different situations but it is with the government to make use it to its optimum level. The failures become mistakes when it is corrected later and it is time for the government to set aright the mistake of the past and win the confidence of many when the income tax code and company law are being amended substantially. In order to bring facts to the light, the government would have given the internal audit to members of the one institute and final audit to the member of the other institute. It had done fairly unfair act by giving corporate governenace certificate to CAs and not including CS in the representations to National Tax tribunal and such mistakes can be innumberable in the past. The fact is that the Government has failed to use the talents of the members to the full extent but did not fail to make use of the step motherly attitude towards its later babies. This is to bury the past and an appeal to government to make use of the talent banks of this country in order to avoid any other financial failures in the future. Ultimately the brunt of ‘non compliance of any law’ is borne by the client or corporate

Posted On 10/4/2009 6:52:12 PM