Auditguru Auditguru Frequently Asked Questions(FAQ) Auditguru Auditguru
 Meet Us Here
Simran Kaur asked 1 year ago

Hello sir in CNO 664 partnership with ICAEW was earlier allowed because they are treated as member of ICAI but later ICAI withdraw the resolution. So I have a doubt in the conclusion paragraph which states that: ‘Even a CA from ICAEW who was eligible to become member of the Institute, the profit sharing agreement stated in the question goes against the provision of Clause (4). Hence, it would constitute professional misconduct.’
So my question is 
(a) Partnership with members of ICAEW is not allowed as of now but if earlier it was allowed, profit sharing was not allowed?
Is that what solution suggest? If Yes/No then why?
(b) And keeping other things aside, the simple conclusion would be the partnership with Member of ICAEW is now not allowed Hence, it would constitute professional misconduct under clause 4 of 1st Schedule of Part 1 

1 Answers
RaviRavi Staff answered 1 year ago

we have taken answer from icai material, there is some ambiguity regarding what they want to say. below is final conclusion
earlier partnership was allowed with some foreign professionals, as they become partner sharing can be done under clause 2 because they have become partners and it is clarified in clause 2
now they are not allowed to become partner directly, so they cannot share fees also, so both things are not allowed as on today

Call Back Request