The Supreme Court clarified that Chartered Accountants do not need a minimum of 25 years of experience to be considered for appointment as technical members in tribunals, including the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).
The clarification has arrived from a Bench led by Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran, after a mention by the counsel representing the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI). The Bench issued this clarification in continuation of its November 19 judgment in the Madras Bar Association case, which had struck down several provisions of the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021.
ICAI Pushes for Parity With the Legal Profession
The ICAI in the hearing specified that the court had earlier struck down the condition mandating that advocates be at least 50 years old to be appointed as judicial members of tribunals. He mentioned that the same logic must be applied to the CAs, as the 25-year experience rule excludes CAs from qualifying before the age of 50.
The Bench, Accepting the Argument, Observed:
“It is submitted that by such a requirement, a CA would be entitled to be considered only after he attains the age of 50 years. A similar case for lawyers having 25 years of practice has already been held invalid and unconstitutional by this Court.”
SC Strikes Down the Provision
The Supreme Court, agreeing with the submissions, held that it is arbitrary, discriminatory, and unconstitutional to impose a minimum of 25 years of experience on CAs for appointments as technical members.
The Bench mentioned that:
“If such a provision is held to be valid, it will permit CAs to enter service only after they attain the age of 50 years. We have already held that a similar provision may not be sustainable in the case of advocates. There should be no difficulty in applying the same analogy.”
Subsequently, the court declared that the experience requirement for CAs is unconstitutional and need not be enforced.
Directions to the Union Government
Also, the Apex court asked that the Union Government must keep the same observation during making a new law for tribunal appointments in compliance with the rulings of the court.
| Case Title | Madras Bar Association vs Union of India and Another |
| Case No. | WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 1018 OF 2021 |
| Supreme Court | Read Order |
