(a) Comment on the following with reference to the provisions of the Chartered Accountant Act 1949: (1) CA. Pankaj accepted professional work of…

(a) (a) (1) Restriction on fees based on a Percentage: According to Clause (10) of Part I of First Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949, a Chartered Accountant in practice shall be deemed to be guilty of professional misconduct if he charges or offers to charge, accepts or offers to accept in respect of any professional employment fees which are based on a percentage of profits or which are contingent upon the findings, or results of such employment, except as permitted under any regulations made under this Act. However, Regulation 192 exempts Chartered Accountants in practice to charge fees based on a percentage of profits or contingent upon findings or results for professional work for certain professional services. Regulation 192 specifically states that in the case of a valuer for the purposes of direct taxes and duties, the fees may be based on a percentage of the value of the property valued. Conclusion: Consequently, CA. Pankaj shall not be deemed to be guilty of professional misconduct, as he is within the permissible scope of charging fees based on a percentage of the property valued. (2) Failed to Supply Information Called For: In accordance with Clause (2) of Part III of the First Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949, a member, whether in practice or not, is considered to be engaged in professional misconduct if he fails to provide the information requested or does not comply with the requirements set forth by the Institute, Council, or any of its Committees, including the Director (Discipline), Board of Discipline, Disciplinary Committee, Quality Review Board, or the Appellate Authority. Conclusion: Therefore, in the given scenario, CA. Anita has neglected to respond to the Institute's letters seeking confirmation of her appointment date and has not submitted her membership certificate. Consequently, she is deemed to be guilty of professional misconduct as given in Clause (2) of Part III of the First Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949. (b) Disclosure of Client's Information: Confidentiality is one of fundamental principles governing professional ethics. Clause (1) of Part I of the Second Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949, addresses professional misconduct related to the disclosure of information by a chartered accountant in practice concerning the business of their clients. Such disclosure to any person other than the client, without the client's consent or unless mandated by prevailing law, is considered a breach of conduct. The Code of Ethics emphasizes that this duty continues even after the completion of the assignment, except when disclosure is necessary for the performance of professional duties. In the provided case, CA. Johny disclosed significant information about his client's business without obtaining the client's consent, believing that it would enhance the audience's understanding of the topic. Conclusion: Therefore, this action of CA. Johny constitutes professional misconduct under Clause (1) of Part I of the Second Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949.