Islamabad, July 10, 2025 – In a significant development, the Competition Appellate Tribunal (CAT) has rejected the appeal filed by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Pakistan (ICAP), upholding a previous decision by the Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) that penalized the institute for alleged price-fixing practices.
The competition case stems from suo moto proceedings initiated by the CCP back in 2008. At the center of the controversy was ICAP’s revised Accounting Technical Release 14 (ATR-14), which was approved during its 197th Council meeting held on July 25, 2008. The revised document introduced minimum hourly charge-out rates and fixed audit fees for services provided to public sector entities—a move the CCP viewed as a violation of the Competition Ordinance, 2007.
The competition watchdog found that ATR-14 facilitated an anti-competitive agreement by setting minimum fees, which distorted free market pricing. As a result, the CCP declared the revised ATR-14 null and void, instructed ICAP to remove it from its Members’ Handbook, and ordered the publication of a withdrawal notice in two widely circulated newspapers. A penalty of Rs. 1 million was also imposed on the Institute.
ICAP, represented by senior counsel Dr. Farogh Naseem, filed an appeal with CAT, arguing that ICAP, as a statutory regulator, had the mandate to issue such pricing guidelines, especially for audits involving public sector organizations. He requested the Tribunal to set aside the CCP’s ruling, framing the guidelines as a measure of quality control rather than price-fixing.
However, the CCP’s legal team pushed back, arguing that ICAP’s actions fell squarely under anti-competitive behavior, regardless of its regulatory standing. They stressed that competition laws apply universally and that no institution has the authority to undermine market dynamics through collusive price-fixing arrangements.
After extensive deliberations, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the CCP and dismissed ICAP’s appeal, reinforcing the principle that all market participants, including regulatory bodies, must comply with competition rules.
In a related matter, CAT also dismissed a separate competition appeal filed by the Karachi Stock Exchange over allegations of abuse of dominant position, labeling the case as infructuous.
This ruling marks a clear warning that ICAP and other institutions cannot bypass competition laws under the guise of regulation.