ICAI vs BCI: Which Is Stricter?

India’s professional regulatory landscape is shaped by two powerful statutory bodies: the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) and the Bar Council of India (BCI). Both play a pivotal role in ensuring the competence, discipline, and ethical standards of their respective professions — Chartered Accountants (CAs) and Advocates.

While their core objectives are similar, they differ significantly in structure, functioning, accountability, and disciplinary enforcement. This article explains the key differences between ICAI and BCI, how members are selected in both, and which institution is stricter in professional governance.

Overview: ICAI vs BCI

Entry to Profession

ICAI (Chartered Accountants)

• Eligibility: Class 12 pass to begin Foundation course.
• Process:
  1. CA Foundation → CA Intermediate → Articleship (2 years) → CA Final.
  2. Mandatory completion of orientation, IT training, and soft skills programs.
• Pass Percentage: 5–12% for CA Final (among the lowest in India).
• Ongoing Requirement: CPE Hours (Continuing Professional Education).

BCI (Advocates)

• Eligibility: LLB degree — either 5-year integrated or 3-year post-graduation.
• Exam: All India Bar Examination (AIBE) to receive Certificate of Practice.
• Pass Percentage: Approximately 80% in recent years.
• Internship: Not mandatory but commonly undertaken during LLB.

Conclusion: ICAI has a more rigorous and layered entry process compared to BCI. Its academic and practical barriers are higher.

Who Governs the Professionals?

• Chartered Accountants: Registered members of ICAI; must comply with its Code of Ethics, audit standards, and training requirements. ICAI can suspend, fine, or remove them from the register.
• Advocates: Must enroll with State Bar Councils, and pass AIBE for BCI certification. Subject to disciplinary action by State Councils and reviewed by BCI in appellate cases.

This distinction is important:
CAs are governed centrally by ICAI.
Lawyers are governed by decentralized State Bar Councils, with BCI as the apex authority.

How Are ICAI and BCI Members Selected?

ICAI: Council Composition

• Governing Body: Central Council of ICAI
• Total Members: 40 (as per Section 9 of the CA Act)
  • Elected Members: 32 CAs elected by ICAI members across regions.
  • Nominated Members: Up to 8 nominated by the Central Government (typically experts from law, finance, or administration).
• Term: 3 years
• Leadership: President and Vice-President elected annually by Council members from among themselves.

This ensures a blend of democratic participation and government oversight.

BCI: Council Composition

• Governing Body: Bar Council of India
• Constituted By: Representatives elected from all State Bar Councils.
• Members:
  • Each State Bar Council elects members based on the number of advocates enrolled (generally 1 for every 10,000 advocates).
• Leadership: Chairman and Vice-Chairman are elected by BCI members.
• Term: Typically 5 years.

However, delays in elections and long-pending appointments have been reported in several State Bar Councils, affecting efficiency.

Disciplinary Powers and Mechanisms

ICAI

• ICAI has a well-structured disciplinary framework:
  • Disciplinary Directorate
  • Board of Discipline
  • Disciplinary Committee
• Can impose:
  • Suspension or removal from register,
  • Monetary fines,
  • Permanent debarring.
• Proceedings and outcomes are published monthly in ICAI journals and online portals.

BCI

• Disciplinary matters are primarily handled by State Bar Councils.
• BCI acts as an appellate authority and policy setter.
• Challenges:
  • Lack of regular enforcement,
  • Many disciplinary matters remain pending for years,
  • Limited public visibility of actions taken.

Courtroom strikes, advocate misconduct, and violations of legal ethics often go unpunished or delayed despite Supreme Court rulings prohibiting such practices.

Comparative Overview

Based on the above, ICAI is widely seen as more stringent and organized in its professional regulation and ethical oversight.

Conclusion

Both ICAI and BCI are vital institutions for maintaining integrity in financial and legal professions. However, the ICAI stands out for its rigorous entry process, centralized governance, and consistent disciplinary action. The structure ensures accountability and helps maintain higher professional standards among Chartered Accountants.

The BCI, although important in shaping legal education and upholding professional ethics, suffers from fragmentation, delayed processes, and limited enforcement capability. Reforms in transparency, timely disciplinary actions, and structural coordination are essential for BCI to match the regulatory standards seen in ICAI.

Read More: Foreigners Subject to Dual Tax Regime Under Singapore’s Income Tax Laws

• Author
• Recent Posts

Mariya Paliwala

Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 5+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies like LiveLaw & Taxscan.

Latest posts by Mariya Paliwala (see all)

• Rakt Chandan Racket Busted: Syndicate Used Coconut Fibre Cover to Exploit Customs Loophole via Pune - July 16, 2025
• Timeframe In Which Karnataka High Court Granted Interim Bail In Rs. 665 Cr GST Fraud Case Raises Serious Questions: Supreme Court - July 16, 2025
• Supreme Court to Hear Review Petitions on ED’s Powers Under PMLA on July 31 - July 16, 2025