MSME Dues Disclosure Was Not Required in FY 2016-17: ICAI Clears Auditor:

MSME Dues Disclosure Was Not Required in FY 2016-17: ICAI Clears Auditor

The ICAI Disciplinary Board agreed with the respondent's submission that for the financial year 2016-17, there was no legal requirement to disclose the disputed dues.

Auditor found NOT GUILTY for Professional Misconduct

authorNidhidateJan 13, 2026
Last update on Jan 13, 2026
MSME Dues Disclosure Was Not Required in FY 2016-17: ICAI Clears Auditor The complainant, Mr Gagan Parasher, Managing Director of Shanivi Construction Pvt Ltd, filed a complaint against CA Neeraj Goel, the partner of Walker Chandiok & Co. LLP, for alleged audit failure in the financial statements of Indraprashta Gas Limited for the financial year 2016-17.
ICAI Levies Rs. 2 Lakh Penalty on CA for Lapse in Due Diligence on MCA Filing; Held Guilty for Professional Misconduct
Shanivi Construction Pvt. Ltd, is an MSME supplying services to Indraprashta Gas Limited, where the respondent was a statutory auditor. The complainant claimed that Rs 2.52 crore principal and Rs 5.64 crore interest amount were due on IGL. But, this amount was not properly disclosed in IGL's accounts of financial statements as required under the MSMED Act 2006. The complainant alleged that the respondent auditor failed to disclose the same in his audit report just to avoid the questions from investors, bankers and shareholders. The respondent on the other side argued that the amount was never accepted as a liability by IGL, and it was under dispute. IGL also filed a writ petition challenging the small enterprise status of the complainant company. He further submitted that there was no such requirement to disclose the disputed unpaid dues to MSMEs for the financial year 2016-17.
ICAI Dismisses Complaint Against CA Finding No Evidence of Forgery or Misuse of Digital Signature
The ICAI Disciplinary Board agreed with the respondent's submission that for the financial year 2016-17, there was no legal requirement to disclose the disputed dues. These requirements came into effect only from April 1, 2021. The committee noted that the respondent has provided all the detailed submissions and proofs against the allegations. Since the alleged amount was not material and was a remote liability, the committee concluded that CA Neeraj Goel was NOT GUILTY of professional misconduct under Clause (7) of Part I of the Second Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949.

About Author

Nidhi

Content Writer

Nidhi is a skilled content writer specializing in personal finance. She creates clear, engaging articles on mutual funds, investments, insurance, and wealth-building strategies. With a passion for simplifying complex financial topics, Nidhi helps readers make informed money decisions with confidence. She can be reached at [email protected]
Studycafe
New Delhi, Delhi, India
1833
Up Next

Loading suggestions…