Prudential PLC v. Special Commissioner of Income Tax Citation
[2009] EWHC 2494 (Admin)
The High Court of Justice (Queen's Bench Division refused to extend the professional confidentiality privilege to accountants and held that it applies only to the lawyers. The court further concluded that accountants did not come within the clients' purview of privileged communications based on past precedents. The court however drew a distinction between legal
advice privilege and litigation privilege which are the sub-headings of the overall privilege. The court observed that while legal advisory privilege extends only to advice given by lawyers, litigation privilege, in the court's assumption, could extend to clients represented by persons other than lawyers.
S. R. Batliboi v. Department of Income Tax (Investigation) Citation: [2009]
315 ITR 137 (Delhi) Alternative Citation: W.P. (c) 9479/2007
The tax department had seized the laptops of the auditors and accountants while the latter were conducting an audit for their client. As observed in the case, the auditors agreed to provide the department all relevant data relating to the concerned client who was under department's investigation. The department's insistence on securing total and unrestricted access to the laptops was however rejected by the court on constitutional grounds and that allowing such access would tantamount to professional misconduct on the part of the auditors. Interestingly, no reference to the Evidence Act was made in the judgment.
No comments:
Post a Comment