Dear Friends,
Is 3.5 years of articleship period too much or adequate?
According to you what should be the period of articleship?
Regards
Kaushik
Kaushik Vankadkar (Service) (350 Points)
31 March 2010Dear Friends,
Is 3.5 years of articleship period too much or adequate?
According to you what should be the period of articleship?
Regards
Kaushik
Raj Saxena (1412th Tiger)
(Struggling Student)
(272 Points)
Replied 31 March 2010
Just Kidding 3yrs are MORE than enuf
Mohan Verma
(Assistant Manager - Finance & Accounts)
(4328 Points)
Replied 31 March 2010
2 years enough
Max Payne
(employed)
(2574 Points)
Replied 31 March 2010
5 years = 3.5 years articles + 1.5 year overtime
CA Ankur Dhamanaskar
(Student)
(295 Points)
Replied 31 March 2010
2.5 years is sufficient........!!!
jose.p
(CA in service)
(1676 Points)
Replied 31 March 2010
Mayank Ahuja
("Learner")
(586 Points)
Replied 31 March 2010
We cannot Define Time Period......
As there is No Time Limit For Learning Any Thing......
If u want quantitaive terms:
In my Opinion If any Article Learns Sincerely & Devoted their Precious Time in Their Offices/ Client Place for Continously 1.5years sincerely...{ Try 2 grab Exposure in Different Field sm part in Tax, Audit, ROC,Etc if possible..} Then I think Its Enough for Basic Requirements of Institute, Atleast we able 2 stand smwhere in Mkt..
Rest is Repeatation..
& need lot of R&D in ur Field where ur Interest lies..
Opinions of Others are Invited...
CA.ViVeK M ACA
(ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT)
(28544 Points)
Replied 31 March 2010
jalpa Gaurang bhatt
(Company Secretary)
(56 Points)
Replied 01 April 2010
I think rather then counting years 4 it, this should be productive.
ABHINAV SURELIA
( CA & CS)
(92 Points)
Replied 01 April 2010
I think 1.5 Years are enough (without any over time)
Devi Kala
(Chartered Accountant)
(359 Points)
Replied 01 April 2010
Ashish Sharma
(Service)
(1028 Points)
Replied 01 April 2010
Originally posted by : jalpa Gaurang bhatt | ||
I think rather then counting years 4 it, this should be productive. |
Yes, Agree with u.