ICAI Clears CA in DLF Audit Case; Holds SQC-1 Policies and EQCR Process Were Complied With:

ICAI Clears CA in DLF Audit Case; Holds SQC-1 Policies and EQCR Process Were Complied With

Disciplinary Committee finds no negligence under Clause (7) despite QRB observations on quality control documentation

ICAI Disciplinary Committee Clears CA in DLF Audit Quality Control Case

authorMeetu KumaridateFeb 18, 2026
Last update on Feb 18, 2026
ICAI Clears CA in DLF Audit Case; Holds SQC-1 Policies and EQCR Process Were Complied With The matter arose from a letter dated 17 January 2014 received from the Quality Review Board (QRB) regarding the statutory audit of DLF Ltd. for FY 2010–11 conducted by M/s Walker Chandiok & Co. LLP. The Technical Reviewer raised concerns about compliance with SQC-1 and SA 220, like client acceptance procedures, engagement quality control review (EQCR), timing of review documentation, and adequacy of test-of-control procedures.
Sales Tax Bar Urges FM to Reduce High GSTAT Appeal Fees; Highlights Burden on MSMEs and Small Traders
The Director (Discipline), in a Prima Facie Opinion, held the Respondent prima facie guilty under the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949. The Respondent denied the allegations, raised objections on limitation and jurisdiction. Issue Before the Committee: Whether the Engagement Partner of DLF Ltd. failed to exercise due diligence or was grossly negligent in complying with SQC-1 and SA 220, thereby attracting Clause (7) of Part I of the Second Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949. Committee's Decision: The Disciplinary Committee of the The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India rejected the preliminary objections on limitation and jurisdiction, holding that procedural timelines do not automatically invalidate disciplinary proceedings.
Sales Tax Bar Urges FM to Reduce High GSTAT Appeal Fees; Highlights Burden on MSMEs and Small Traders
The Committee examined the firm’s Quality Control Manual, independence communications, Voyager audit documentation, client acceptance records, and the Respondent’s affidavit. It found that documented policies under SQC-1 were in place and implemented, and that the EQCR had been conducted prior to issuance of the audit report in compliance with SA 220 and SA 230. In the absence of material establishing lack of due diligence or gross negligence, the Respondent was held Not Guilty of Professional Misconduct under Clause (7) of Part I of the Second Schedule to the Act. To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below

About Author

Meetu Kumari

Content Manager

Meetu Kumari is an Experienced Advocate and Content Writer with 4+ years of demonstrated history of working in the law practice industry. Skilled in Developing Content, Researching, and Drafting. Strong professional with a Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) focused on Law from Gujarat National Law University.
Studycafe
Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
2157
Up Next

Loading suggestions…