LIABILITY OF AUDITORS UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 2013
Lord Justice
Topes had once famously remarked that “The auditor is a watchdog and not a bloodhound.” Companies Act,
2013 does not seem to echo this thought! The kind of stringent measures
prescribed in the Companies Act 2013 against auditors gives the picture that
the Act indeed expects the auditors to be bloodhounds in discharging their duties
and not merely as watch dogs. The Satyam saga seems to have cast a very looming
image in the minds of regulators as far the auditors are concerned.
In the current
write up, we have brought out the penal provisions and the actions which can be
initiated by various regulatory and non regulatory authorities in case of any
lapse on the part of the Auditors in
discharging their duties effectively.
Ø Penalty for non-compliance with any of the
provisions contained in Sections 139, 143, 144 and 145 of the Act –
Section 139
contains provisions regarding appointment of auditors, Section 143 regarding
power and duties of auditors, Section 144 regarding certain services which an
auditor cannot render and Section 145 regarding signing of audit report and
other documents by auditor.
Auditor shall be
punishable with fine which shall not be less than Rs. 25,000/- but which may
extend to Rs. 5,00,000/-
If an auditor
has contravened such provisions knowingly or willfully with the intention to
deceive the company or its shareholders or creditors or tax authorities, he
shall be punishable with imprisonment for
a term which may extend to 1 year
and with fine which shall not be less than Rs. 1,00,000/- but which may extend
to Rs. 25,00,000/-.
If the auditor
is convicted under any of these sections, he shall be liable to refund the remuneration received by him
from the Company and pay for damages
to the company, bodies or authorities or to any other persons for loss arising
out of incorrect or misleading statements of particulars made in his audit
report.
Ø Penalty for failure to disclose fraud
As per Section
143(12), an Auditor is duty bound that if in the course of the performance of
his duties as auditor, he has reason to believe that an offence involving fraud
is being or has been committed against the company by officers or employees of
the company, he shall immediately report the matter to the Central Government.
In case of any
failure on his part to comply with this duty, he shall be punishable with fine
which shall not be less than Rs. 1,00,000/- but which may extend to Rs. 25,00,000/-.
Ø Penalty for professional misconduct – NFRA - Watch on the watch dogs!
National
Financial Review Authority (NFRA) shall have power to investigate, either suo
motu or on a reference made to it by the Central Government into the matters of
professional or other misconduct committed by any member or firm of chartered
accountants, registered under the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949.
Where
professional or other misconduct is proved, NFRA shall have the power to make
order for—
(A) imposing
penalty of—
I) not
less than Rs. 1,00,000/-, but which may extend to five times of the fees
received, in case of individuals; and
(II) not
less than Rs. 10,00,000/-, but which may extend to ten times of the fees
received, in case of firms;
B) debarring the member or the firm from
engaging himself or itself from practice as member of the Institute of
Chartered Accountant of India referred to in clause (e) of sub-section (1)
of section 2 of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 for a minimum period of 6
months or for such higher period not exceeding 10 years as may be decided by
the National Financial Reporting Authority.
Ø Action in case of fraud by auditors
·
Change of auditors by NCLT –
Without
prejudice to any action under the provisions of this Act or any other law for
the time being in force, the NCLT either suo motu or on an application made to
it by the Central Government or by any person concerned, if it is satisfied
that the auditor of a company has, whether directly or indirectly, acted in a
fraudulent manner or abetted or colluded in any fraud by, or in relation to,
the company or its directors or officers, it may, by order, direct the company
to change its auditors.
An auditor,
whether individual or firm, against whom final order has been passed by the
Tribunal under this section shall not be eligible to be appointed as an auditor
of any company for a period of 5 years from the date of passing of the order
and the auditor shall also be liable for action under section 447.
·
Disqualification for appointment as
auditor –
A person who has
been convicted by a court of an offence involving fraud and a period of 10
years has not elapsed from the date of such conviction shall be disqualified to
be appointed as auditor of any company.
·
Action under Section 447 –
Without
prejudice to any liability including repayment of any debt under this Act or
any other law for the time being in force, any person who is found to be guilty
of fraud, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be
less than 6 months but which may extend to 10 years and shall also be liable to
fine which shall not be less than the amount involved in the fraud, but which
may extend to 3 times the amount involved in the fraud.
·
Liability of firm –
Where, in case
of audit of a company being conducted by an audit firm, it is proved that the
partner or partners of the audit firm has or have acted in a fraudulent manner
or abetted or colluded in any fraud by, or in relation to or by, the company or
its directors or officers, the liability, whether civil or criminal as provided
in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force, for such act shall
be of the partner or partners concerned of the audit firm and of the firm jointly
and severally.
Ø Class Action Suits
Any 100 or more
members/deposit holders of the company or 10% of the total number of
members/deposit holders of the company can file a class action suit to claim
damages or compensation or demand any other suitable action against the auditor in the manner prescribed under Section
245 of the Act.
Action under
this section can be initiated against the auditor including audit firm of the
company for any improper or misleading statement of particulars made in the
audit report or for any fraudulent, unlawful or wrongful act or conduct.
Where the
members or depositors seek any damages or compensation or demand any other
suitable action from or against an audit firm, the liability shall be of the
firm as well as of each partner who was involved in making any improper or
misleading statement of particulars in the audit report or who acted in a
fraudulent, unlawful or wrongful manner.
Author
CS Dhanapal
E-mail: csdhanapal@gmail.com
**********************************************************************************************
0 comments:
Post a Comment