dec 2016 - students newsletter -...

STUDENTS'NEWSLETTERSILIGURI BRANCH OF EICASA

THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTEREDACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA( SET UP BY AN ACT OF PARLIAMENT )

DECEMBER 2016

THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIAICAI BHAWAN, Post Box No. 7100,Indraprastha Marg, New Delhi - 110002Tel. : +91(11) 39893989E-mail : [email protected] Website : http://www.icai.org

EASTERN INDIA REGIONAL COUNCIL, ICAI7, Anandilal Poddar Sarani (Russel Street)Kolkata - 700071Tel. : +91(33) 39893989E-mail : [email protected] : http://www.eirc-icai.org

SILIGURI BRANCH OF EIRC OF ICAIICAI Bhawan, Near Over Bridge, Tinbatti MoreSiliguri, Dist-Jalpaiguri, W.B. - 743015Tel. : +91(353)256 0445/2984E-mail : [email protected] : http://www.siliguri-icai.org

STUDENTS' NEWSLETTER December 2016I02

EDITORIAL TEAM

1. CA. Pankaj Kumar Maskara

Editor ( Members Newsletter)

2. CA. Sanjay DasEditor (Students Newsletter)

3. CA. Kanhaiyalal Khetan

4. CA. Vivek AgarwalSub-

1. CA. Adarsh Chandak

2. CA. Lekh Ram NyoliwalaIn-charge - Student Inputs

3. CA. Manish Agarwal (306118)In-charge - Members Inputs

4. CA. Pooja Jindal

5. CA. Prateek Pugalia

6. CA. Rahul Goyal

1. CA. R. N. Chandak

CA. Manish Goyal

1. Aditya Minda

2. Rishab Goyal

3. Sachin Agarwal

4. Raksha Agarwal

5. Sneha Agarwal

6. Anindita Roy

Editor

MEMBERS

ADVISORS

STUDENT NEWSLETTER COMMITTEE MEMBERS

The views and opinions expressed or

implied in STUDENTS' NEWSLETTER

are those of the authors and do not

necessarily reflect those of Siliguri

Branch of ICAI. Unsolicited articles and

transparencies are sent at the owner's

risk and the publisher accepts no liability

for loss or damage. Material in this

publication may not be reproduced,

whether in part or in whole, without the

consent of Siliguri Branch of ICAI.

Announcement

Articles are invited from Students in the

upcoming issues of the Students' Newsletter.

The articles based on CA curriculum should be

received latest by 10th of the preceding month

in which the article is to be published. The article

should comprise 1600 to 2200 words only. The

author are advised to

1. Mail a Softcopy of the article with complete

communication along with e-mail address

and Student Registration number to

[email protected]. Article received without the

details / enclosures specified above will not

be considered.

2. A Softcopy of latest passport size colour

photograph should also be mailed.

Articles invited for Students' Newsletter

Siliguri Branch of EICASA of ICAI

From The Vice Chairman's Desk

Fraud Reporting Under Companies Act 2013

The Indian Demonetisation

Pradhan Mantra Garib Kalyan Yojana

Service Tax Notifications

Glimpses

03

04

09

10

11

12

Index

STUDENTS' NEWSLETTER December 2016I 03

CA SANJAY DASChairmanSiliguri Branch of EICASA of ICAI

From The Vice Chairman's Desk

Dear students,

I would like to acknowledge and felicitate each and every

student of Siliguri Branch for their radical and excellent

performance through out the year. I am pleased and delighted

with their dedication and solemnity.

We are almost at the end of the year. It has been a great

time with various enlightened activities, commitments, new

aims and proposals. Now when we look behind we can recon

the gap we have bridged and fill with a hope to touch the

updated bench mark.

Looking forward with hope with your participation in the

same way as

Wishing all A Very Happy & Prosperous New Year and all

the Best for your Upcoming Results.

� Unity is strength when there is teamwork and

collaboration, wonderful things can be achieved �

With Warm Regards,CA SANJAY DASChairman Siliguri Branch of EICASA of ICAI


CA. Pankaj Maskara,Chairman, Siliguri Branch of EIRC of ICAI.

Fraud Reporting Under Companies Act 2013By

NANDINI PAULERO-0190475

¦INTRODUCTION

¦What is Fraud?

8th November 2016, came out as a night mare to the entire nation , 500 and 1000 currency note is no more a legal tender now. The prima fascia reason is to get rid of black money resulting from fraud and put an end to corruption. However, we spectacular and incredible Indians even found a way to overcome these issues through the use of manipulation and falsification such as distribution of physical cash among poors, neighbors, relatives, minors with a contract and many more. People who cannot even sound the word "de- monetization", knows far well about its weak lines and take shelter under this. More than Rs. 8000crores money have been deposited in various banks within a couple of days next to this historical announcement, which is much less than the accumulated black money estimated. Few more biggest fraud we have witnessed in the recent past are Satyam scandals, Sarada chit fund etc.

So, as we cannot eliminate the total wrong doing but steps can be taken to minimize it to a level, stakeholders can cope up with. Hence, Companies act 2013 came out with a section 143(12), which comprehend reporting of all types of fraud in terms of monetary value to the Central Government.

The definition of fraud as per SA 240 and the explanation of frauds per Section 447 of the 2013 Act are similar, except that under Section 447, fraud includes 'acts with an intent to injure the interests of the company or its shareholders or its creditors or any other person, whether or not there is any wrongful or wrongful loss.'However, an auditor may not be able to detect acts that have intent to injure the interests of the company or cause wrongful gain or wrongful loss, unless the financial effects of such acts are reflected in the books of account/financialstatements of the company. For example, an auditor may not be able to detect if an employee is receiving pay-offs for favoring a specific vendor, which is a fraudulent act, since such pay-offs would not be recorded in the books of account of the company;? if the password of a key managerial personnel is stolen and misused to access confidential/restricted information, the effect of the same may not be determinable by the management or by the auditor; if an employee is alleged to be carrying on business parallel to the company's business and has been diverting customer orders to his company, the auditor may not be able to detect the same since such sales transactions are not recorded in the books of the company. Therefore, the auditor shall consider the requirements of the SAs, insofar as it relates to the risk of fraud, including the definition of fraud as stated in SA 240, in planning and performing his audit procedures in an audit of financial statements to address the risk of material misstatement due to fraud.

Requirements similar to Section 143(12) of the 2013 Act were not prescribed in the 1956 Act. Even the reporting under the Companies (Auditor's Report) Order, 2003 (CARO) only requires the auditors to report to the members on any fraud on or by the company that had been noticed or reported during the year. As such, auditors would not have reported on frauds as envisaged under Section 143(12) in those periods prior to coming into effect of the 2013 Act. Accordingly, in case of fraud relating to earlier years to which the Companies Act, 1956 was applicable, reporting under Section 143(12) will arise only if the suspected offence of fraud is identified by the auditor in the course of performance of his duties as an auditor during the financial years beginning on or after April 1, 2014 and to the extent


that the same was not dealt with in the prior financial years either in the financial statements or in the audit report or in the Board's report under the Companies Act, 1956.

The reporting requirement under Section 143(12) is for the statutory auditors of the company and also equally applies to the cost accountant in practice, conducting cost audit under Section 148 of the Act; and to the company secretary in practice, conducting secretarial audit under Section 204 of the Act. However, the provisions of Section 143(12) do not apply to other professionals who are rendering other services to the company. For example, Section 143(12) does not apply to auditors appointed under other statutes for rendering other services such as tax auditor appointed for audit under Income-tax1 The amendments to Section 143(12) have come into force on December 14,2015.Sales Tax or VAT auditors appointed for audit under the respective Sales Tax or VAT legislations. It may also be noted that internal auditors covered under Section 138 are not specified as persons who are required to report under Section 143(12).As per sub-rule (3) of Rule 12 of the Companies (Audit and Auditors) Rules,2014,the provisions of sub-section (12) of Section 143 read with Rule 13 of the Companies (Audit and Auditors) Rules, 2014 regarding reporting of frauds by the auditor shall also extend to a branch auditor appointed under\Section 139 to the extent it relates to the concerned branch.It may be noted that Section 143(12) includes only fraud by officers or employees of the company and does not include fraud by third parties such as vendors and customers.

The information about possible offence involving fraud, obtained by the auditor during the course of his audit, can be classified into four stages :

"Speculation" refers to information from unrelated source which is a rumour, hearsay, gossip, assumption, guess, thought or supposition. Examples of information which could be classified as speculation are provided below :

Rumours about management accepting kick-backs from suppliers/service providers for awarding contracts, but no proof.

Media reports indicating that the company is planning invest in totally unrelated, high-risk business.

Board of Directors consisting of some persons exposed to illegal acts.

Gossip that certain business groups/entities are front end for an undisclosed owner.

a "suspicion" will lead to identification of fraud risk factors during the course of audit. Examples of information which could be classified as suspicion are provided below

Recurring negative cash flows from operations or an inability to generate cash flows from operations while reporting earnings and earnings growth.

There is excessive pressure on management or operating personnel to meet financial targets established by those charged with governance, including sales or profitability incentive goals.

¦ Coverage

¦ Stages of Identification of Fraud

c) Reason to Believe:

d) Knowledge :

a) Speculation :

Ø

Ø

Ø

Ø

b) Suspicion :

Ø

Ø

Ø

Ø

Ø

Ø

'Reason to believe' indicates that the matter should be more than just a suspicion. 'Suspicion' when corroborated with supporting evidence can provide 'reason to believe'. Examples of information which could be classified as "reason to believe" are provided below :

Material misstatement identified during the course of audit. Identification of any material weakness in the internal controls.

Significant related party transactions not at arm's length and not supported by a proper business rationale. Material discrepancies between book stock and physical stock.

Acquisition of significant assets which are unrelated to the business.

"Knowledge" indicates "reason to believe" with more persuasive evidence based on further procedures performed by the auditor. Examples of information which could be classified as "knowledge" are provided below :

Material misstatement identified during the course of audit not supported by appropriate



rationale/explanation from the management, indicating that the misstatement was intentional.

Identification of any material weakness in the internal controls which has resulted in material damage/huge loss for the company.

Significant related party transactions not at arm's length and not supported by appropriate evidence. Management is not able to provide appropriate rationale/substantiation for undertaking such transactions and such transactions may be prejudicial to the interests of the shareholders, based on the materiality determined by the auditor.

Sudden resignation of an employee belonging to the senior

a)Separation of duties. Eg:- Single person is not responsible for preparing and authorizing same voucher.

b)Proper coverage with CCTV camera.

c)Physical and logical security need to be introduced for unwanted access to companies documents, facility, supplies etc.

d)External confirmation.e.g. receivable, payables, bank statement etc.

e)Bank reconciliation.

f)Surprise check in certain areas like cash, inventory, investment.

g)Checking over related party transaction.

As per sub-section (12) of section 143 of the Companies Act, 2013, if an auditor of a company in the course of the performance of his duties as auditor, has reason to believe that an offence of fraud involving such amount or amounts as may be prescribed, is being or has been committed in the company by its officers or employees, the auditor shall report the matter to the Central Government within such time and in such manner as may be prescribed In this regard, Rule 13 of the Companies (Audit and Auditors) Rules, 2014 has been prescribed. Sub-rule (1) of the said rule states that if an auditor of a company, in the course of the performance of his duties as statutory auditor, has reason to believe that an offence of fraud, which involves or is expected to involve individually an amount 1 crore or above, is being or has been committed against the company by its officers or employees, the auditor shall report the matter to the Central Government

I.The auditor shall report the matter to the Board or the Audit Committee, as the case may be, immediately but not later than 2 days of his knowledge of the fraud, seeking their reply or Vobservations within 45 days

II.On receipt of such reply or observations, the auditor shall forward his report and the reply or observations of the Board or the Audit Committee along with his comments (on such reply or observations of the Board or the Audit Committee) to the Central Government within 15 days from the date of receipt of such reply or observations;

III.In case the auditor fails to get any reply or observations from the Board or the Audit Committee within the stipulated period of 45 days, he shall forward his report to the Central Government along with a note containing the details of his report that was earlier forwarded to the Board or the Audit Committee for which he has not received any reply or observations.

IV.The report shall be sent to the Secretary, Ministry of Corporate Affairs in a sealed cover by Registered Post with Acknowledgement Due or by Speed Post followed by an e- mail in confirmation of the same;

Ø

Ø

Ø

¦ Techniques of preventing Fraud& detecting fraud

¦REPORTING OF FRAUD TO THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

¦The manner of reporting the matter to the Central Government is as follows:


V.The report shall be on the letter head of the auditor containing postal address, e- mail address and contact telephone number or mobile number and be signed by the auditor with his seal and shall indicate his Membership Number; and

VI.The report shall be in the form of a statement as specified in Form ADT 4.

Sub-section (12) of section 143 of the Companies Act, 2013 further prescribes that in case of a fraud involving lesser than the specified amount [i.e. less than 1 crore], the auditor shall report the matter to the audit committee constituted under section 177 or to the Board in other cases within such time and in such manner as may be prescribed. In this regard, sub- rule (3) of Rule 13 of the Companies (Audit and Auditors) Rules, 2014 states that in case of a fraud involving lesser than the amount specified in sub- rule (1) [i.e. less than 1 crore], the auditor shall report the matter to Audit Committee constituted under section 177 or to the Board immediately but not later than 2 days of his knowledge of the fraud and he shall report the matter specifying the following :

(a) Nature of Fraud with description;

(b) Approximate amount involved; and

(c) Parties involved.

(d) Remedial action taken.

In case a fraud has already been reported or has been identified/detected by the management or through the company's vigil/whistle blower mechanism and has been/is being remediated/dealt with by them and such case is informed to the auditor, he will not be required to report the same under Section 143(12) since he has not per se identified the fraud. The auditor should apply professional skepticism to evaluate/verify that the fraud was indeed identified/detected in all aspects by the management or through the company's vigil/whistle blower mechanism so that distinction can be clearly made with respect to frauds identified/detected due to matters raised by the auditor vis-à-vis those identified/detected by the company through its internal control mechanism.

Sub section (12) of section 143 of the Companies Act, 2013 furthermore prescribes that the companies, whose auditors have reported frauds under this sub section (12) to the audit committee or the Board, but not reported to the Central Government, shall disclose the details about such frauds in the Board's report in such manner as may be prescribed In this regard, sub- rule (4) of Rule 13 of the Companies (Audit and Auditors) Rules, 2014 states that the auditor is also required to disclose in the Board's Report the following details of each of the fraud reported to the Audit Committee or the Board under sub rule (3) during the year:-

(a) Nature of Fraud with description;

(b) Approximate amount involved; and

(c) Parties involved.

(d) Remedial action taken.

As per Section 129(4) of the 2013 Act, the provisions relating to audit of the standalone financial statements of the holding company shall also apply to the audit of the consolidated financial statements. Since the audit of the consolidated financial statements has also been made one of the duties of the auditor, a question that arises is - should the auditor report on suspected offence involving frauds that may have taken place in any of the subsidiaries, joint ventures, associates of the company?

¦ The manner of reporting the matter to the Audit Committee or Board

¦Reporting by management or other person

¦ Disclosure in the Board Report

¦Reporting on Suspected Offence Involving Fraud in case of Consolidated Financial Statements


Reporting under Section 143(12) arises only if a suspected offence of fraud is being or has been committed in the company by its officers or employees.

The first blush of this provision is to reduce the fraudulent activity undertaken by various stakeholders. The penalizing effect will restrict employee and officers to conduct malpractices to a ceiling limit. CARO 2015 states to disclose whether any fraud on or by the company has been noticed or reported during the year. Again CARO 2016 talks about the same with little modification. It requires to disclose whether fraud has been taken place on the company by the officers or employee to be reported. Responsibility is now restricted to officers or employee.

"When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves".

It can be concluded that the provision of section 143(12) has been a great change to the corporate sector in India.It stands as a firewall in front of misrepresentation and fraud. Like Sun and the Moon , truth can never be hided. So, its better to stay away from such offence and crime.

Accordingly, the auditor of the parent company is not required to report on frauds under Section 143(12) if they are not being or have not been committed in the parent company by the officers or employees of the parent company but relate to frauds in :

a)A component that is an Indian company, since the auditor of that Indian company is required to report on suspected offence involving frauds under Section 143 (12) in respect of such company; and

b)A foreign corporate component or a component that is not a company since the component auditors' of such components are not covered under Section 143(12).However, the auditor of the parent company in India will be required to report on suspected offence involving frauds in the components of the parent company, if the suspected offence of fraud in the component is being or has been committed by employees or officers of the parent company and if such suspected offence involving fraud in the component is against the parent company, if:

a)the principal auditor identifies/detects such suspected offence involving fraud in the component �in the course of the performance of his duties as an auditor� of the consolidated financial statements; or

b)the principal auditor is directly informed of such a suspected offence involving fraud in the component by the component auditor and the management had not identified/is not aware of such suspected offence involving fraud in the component; or

c)a component that is not a company since the component auditors of such components are not covered under Section 143(12).

VII.Reporting under Section 143(12) when the

¦ CONCLUSION



The Indian DemonetisationByBIKRAM PAULERO 0183394

The demonetisation of ` 500 and `1000 banknotes was a policyen acted by the Government of India on 8 November 2016. All ` 500 and ` 1000 banknotes of the Mahatma Gandhi Series ceased to be legal tender in India from 9 November 2016.The announcement was made by the Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi in an unscheduled live televised address at 20:15 Indian Standard Time (IST) on 8 November. In the announcement, Modi declared that use of all ` 500 and ` 1000banknotes of the Mahatma Gandhi Series would be invalid from midnight of the same day and announced the issuance of new ` 500 and ` 2000 banknotes of the Mahatma Gandhi New Series in exchange for the old banknotes. However, the banknote denominations of ` 100, ` 50, ` 20, ` 10 and ` 5 of the Mahatma Gandhi Series remained legal tender and were unaffected by the policy. The government claimed that the demonetisation was an effort to stop counterfeiting of the current banknotes allegedly used for funding terrorism, as well as a crack down on black money in the country. The move was described as an effort to reduce corruption, the use of drugs, and smuggling. However, in the days following the demonetisation, banks and ATMs across the country faced severe cash shortages. The cash shortages had detrimental effects on a number of small businesses, agriculture, and transportation, while people seeking to exchange their notes had lengthy waits, and several deaths were linked to the rush to exchange cash. Also, following Modi's announcement, the BSE SENSEX and NIFTY 50 stock indices crashed for the next two days.The demonetisation received support from several bankers as well as from some international commentators, although it was criticised by members of the opposition parties, which led to debates in both houses of parliament and triggered organised protests against the current government in front of the parliament and elsewhere across India.

There were instances of banknote demonetisations by the previous governments. In January 1946, banknotes of 1000 and 10000 rupee were withdrawn and new notes of 1000, 5000 and 10000 rupee were introduced in 1954. The Janata Party coalition government had again demonetised banknotes of 1000, 5000 and 10000 rupee on 16 January 1978 as a means to curb counterfeit money and black money. In 2012, the Central Board of Direct Taxes had recommended against demonetisation, saying in a report that "demonetisation may not be a solution for tackling black money or economy, which is largely held in the form of benami properties, bullion and jewellery". According to data from income tax probes, black money holders keep only 6% or less of their ill gotten wealth as cash, hence targeting this cash may not be a successful strategy.

We can judge the decision of Demonetisation by the Government based on the industries that get affected the most by it. Firstly, the small retail shops, who thrive on cash flow and don�t really have the facility of Swipe Machines, including the small vendors who sell vegetables and fruits on the street. Apart from this, the industry which gets hit the most is certainly Real Estate. It is a known fact that a big chunk of real estate runs on cash. Most of it in black as well. But some of the points that need to be noted are that many people who were all ready for their investment post 8th November have now either just stopped in their tracks and reconsidering or have just scrapped the idea itself, because lets face it, not everybody will be able to make their investment through white. So yes, chances are there will be a slight decrease in prices for a while, but We�re guessing that�s until the whole demonetisation has run its course entirely. On the other hand, the people who look for Rentals for No Brokerage can continue to do so due to the rise of Online Technology, so not much change over there, except maybe unless they�ve not had their old notes exchanged ;) So in the short run, there will most certainly be a decrease in prices until the demonetisation dust settles, but later on, in the long run, it is believed that everything will be back to how it was and will continue the same way.

So far, it can be said that this is a historical step and should be supported by all. One should look at the bigger picture which will definitely fetch results in the long term. This is what the people have been asking for a long time which has finally happened.

BACKGROUND

Pros & Cons of Demonetisation

CONCLUSION


Pradhan Mantra Garib Kalyan YojanaBy

JOY JIT MALAKARERO : 0178397

The Central Government announced yet another scheme to aid the voluntary disclosure of unaccounted money. Union Finance Minister Arun Jaitley introduced in the Lok Sabha an amendment to the income tax law, to make provisions for the scheme.The taxation laws (second amendment) Bill, 2016 has been introduced in the parliament to amend the provision of the act so that defaulting assesssees are subjected to tax at a higher rate.

As recommended by the experts that instead of allowing people to find illegal ways of converting their black money, the government have offered a opportunity to pay tax with heavy penalty and allow them to come clean therefore not only government gets additional revenue for undertaking welfare activity of the citizen but also the remaining part of the declared income legally comes into the formal economy.About the proposed scheme; Tax and investment regime for Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalian Yojana(PMGKY), This scheme will be in effect from 28 November 2016Requirement of the scheme; The declarant under this scheme shall be required to pay tax @ 30% of the undisclosed income and penalty @ 10% of the undisclosed income. Further, a surcharge to be called 'Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Cess' @33% of tax is also proposed to be levied, In addition to tax surcharge and penalty(totaling to approximately 50%),the declarant shall have to deposit 25% of undisclosed income in a deposit Scheme to be notified by RBI under the 'Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Deposit Scheme,2016',in other words assessee will be left with only 25% of the undisclosed income after such declaration.The declarations under this scheme can be made till December 30, 2016.

An Assessee has an undisclosed income of 9 crore rupee in form of cash and bank deposit can be declared. Under this scheme the assessee shall liable to pay tax as following.

A)Undisclosed income 9,00,00,000 INR.

B)Tax @ 30% of (A) i.e. 2,70,00,000.

C)Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan Cess @ 33.33% of (B) i.e. 8,9,99,100.

D)Penalty 10 % of (A) i.e. 90,00,000.

E)Total (B+C+D) 4,49,99,100.

Effective rate of tax burden 49.999%Total amount to be deposited in Pradhan Mantri Garib Kalyan deposit scheme, 2016 is atleast 25% on the declared undisclosed income. This Amount declared under the scheme will be parked in a government fund for a period of four years @ 0% interest. This fund is meant to be used for improvement of irrigation, housing, toilets, infrastructure, primary education, primary health and livelihood creation. This would leave 25% of the amount in the hands of the black money holder.

BENEFIT

ILLUSTRATION


NOTIFICATION NO. & DATE OF ISSUE SUBJECT

51/2016-Service Tax dt. 30-11-2016

50/2016-Service Tax dt. 22-11-2016

49/2016-Service Tax dt. 09-11-2016

48/2016-Service Tax dt. 09-11-2016

47/2016-Service Tax dt. 09-11-2016

46/2016-Service Tax dt. 09-11-2016

Seeks to amend Place of Provision of Services Rules, 2012 so as to exclude 'online information and database access or retrieval services' from the definition of 'telecommunication services'.

Seeks to amend notification No. 20/2014-ST dated 16th September, 2014 so as to provide exclusive jurisdiction to LTU-Bangalore with respect to online information and database access or retrieval services provided or agreed to be provided by a person located in non-taxable territory and received by a 'non-assessee online recipient'.

Seeks to amend notification No. 30/2012- ST, dated the 20th June, 2016 so as to put compliance liability of service tax payment and procedure on to the service provider located in the non-taxable territory with respect to online information and database access or retrieval services provided in the taxable territory to 'non-assessee online recipient'.

Seeks to amend Service Tax Rules, 1994 so as to prescribe that the person located in non-taxable territory providing online information and database access or retrieval services to 'non-assessee online recipient', as defined therein, is liable to pay service tax and the procedure for payment of service tax.

Seeks to amend notification No. 25/2012-ST dated 20th June , 2016 so as to withdraw exemption from service tax for services provided by a person in non-taxable territory to Government, a local authority, a governmental authority or an individual in relation to any purpose other than commerce, industry or any other business or profession, located in taxable territory.

Seeks to amend Place of Provision of Services Rules, 2012 so as to amend the place of provision of 'online information and database access or retrieval services' with effect from 01.12.1016.

Service Tax Notifications


GLIMPSESGLIMPSES

Career Counseling program Commerce Exhibition on World/National Commerce Education Day

CPT Mock Test Educational Tour to Darjeeling

Essay Writing Competition on World/National Commerce Education Day

dec 2016 - students newsletter -...

Documents