ICAI Advertising Rules 2026: What CA Firms Can Now Do Online

A partner at a mid-sized CA firm sent us a brief for a new website last year. It asked for a “Why choose us” section, a slider of client testimonials, Google star ratings in the header, logos of well-known clients, a pop-up offering a free tax health check and a WhatsApp blast announcing the new site to everyone in the firm’s contacts. Every item on that list would have been ordinary for a dental clinic or an interior designer. For a chartered accountant, most of it can be professional misconduct.

Then the news broke that ICAI had “allowed advertising”. Since April 2026 we have had partners ask whether all of that is now fine. It mostly is not, but some useful things did open up. This guide answers one question: what does the ICAI Code of Ethics 2026 let a CA firm do online, and how do you build a website and content plan that brings enquiries without risk? I have read the advertisement and website chapter of the Code itself, and I quote clause numbers so you can check them. I am a web and software person, not a chartered accountant or an ethics adviser. Treat this as a working map and confirm anything you act on with ICAI’s current Code or the Ethical Standards Board.

What do the ICAI advertising guidelines allow in 2026?

Under the Code of Ethics 2026, a CA firm may advertise through a factual “write-up” of its particulars and services, run a website with articles, videos, client names (with permission), a client login and chat, and push information about non-exclusive services. It still may not solicit work, use testimonials, make exaggerated claims or carry banner ads.

The legal base has not moved. Clause (6) of Part I of the First Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act bars soliciting clients or work “directly or indirectly”, and Clause (7) bars advertising professional attainments or services, with a proviso that a member may advertise “through a write up” within Council guidelines. What changed in 2026 is the content of those guidelines. ICAI’s press release on the 447th Council meeting describes three shifts: a wider scope of “write-up”, push technology for services not exclusive to CAs, and websites for network firms registered with ICAI. ICAI’s 30 May 2026 notice confirms the Code applies from 1 April 2026.

1. What changed on 1 April 2026, and what did not

The headline change is that firms may now push information about non-exclusive services and use a richer website, including client names with permission and photos of professional events. The bans on solicitation, testimonials, superlatives and banner ads carried over unchanged.

A useful way to see the shift is to compare the revised Code with ICAI’s October 2020 advisory on the earlier website guidelines, which listed what websites could not show. Several items on that 2020 list are now permitted. Many CA websites we review were built to the 2020 list and are more restrictive than they need to be. A few were built by agencies that ignored both and are riskier than the partners realise.

Source: ICAI advisory M-626/14/2020 (14 October 2020) and ICAI Code of Ethics 2026, Volume I, Chapter 3 (Council Guidelines for Advertisement, 2008, updated up to December 2025). Clause numbers refer to Chapter 3.

One detail worth noticing: secondary summaries of the new Code do not all agree. One widely shared June 2026 summary says event photos are barred, and also that they are allowed on websites. The Code resolves it. Write-ups generally should not contain event photographs (3.1.3 H, with an exception for cultural and festival photos on social networking sites), while the website rule at 3.3.9 specifically permits a gallery of professional events. This is why I would not rely on blog summaries, including this one, for the final call.

2. Push versus pull: the rule behind most online marketing questions

Pull means a person finds your information because they went looking, such as by searching or visiting your site. Push means you send it to them, such as by email, WhatsApp or a promoted post. Since April 2026, push is allowed only for services not exclusively reserved for chartered accountants.

The Code is precise about this. Clause 3.3.3 says websites may run on pull and push, but for exclusive services “only ‘pull’ model will be permitted”. Clause 3.3.4 says information about exclusive services must not be circulated by email or any other mode except on a specific pull request. Clause 3.3.5 adds that you may not issue circulars or other material soliciting people to visit your website, though you may put the website address on stationery and email signatures. Elsewhere, the commentary on Clause (6) says writing letters or emails to people likely to need a CA “would tantamount to advertisement”, and that a firm profile may be shared with a prospective client only in response to that person’s specific query.

So the practical question for every channel is: who started the contact, and which service is it about? Here is how I read the main channels. Where the Code is silent, I say so.

Source: ICAI Code of Ethics 2026, Volume I, Chapter 2 (Clause (6) commentary) and Chapter 3. The last row is my interpretation, not ICAI text.

The video rule surprises most partners. The commentary on Clause (6) allows educational videos, audios and podcasts on the internet, but says they “should not contain website address”. The designation, the firm name, physical address, phone number and email may be mentioned. If your team is starting a YouTube channel or Instagram reels on GST updates, put the contact details in the description and leave the URL out of the video and its end card.

3. Can a CA firm name clients, show reviews or post on social media?

Yes to client names with written permission, with only the name shown for reserved services. No to testimonials and endorsements. Social media pages are allowed and may be linked from the website, provided the content is a factual write-up and the firm does not ask people to visit, like or follow.

Client names

Clause 3.2.1 allows the “name of the client, and nature of assignment handled, subject to permission of the client”, with the limit that for exclusive services “only client name may be mentioned”. So “ABC Pvt Ltd: GST compliance and bookkeeping” can be fine with permission. “XYZ Ltd: statutory audit” cannot; you may list XYZ Ltd only. In the client portals we build, the permission sits on the client record with a date and the person who gave it, and the website reads from that record. When permission is withdrawn, the name drops off the site the same day.

Testimonials, ratings and Google reviews

Clause 3.1.3 E says the write-up “should not contain testimonials or endorsements concerning Member(s) or the fees charged”. That rules out testimonial sliders, star-rating widgets, “trusted by 500 businesses” banners and video reviews on the site. Reviews that clients post on third-party platforms such as Google Maps are not addressed in the Code by name. My cautious view: do not embed them, do not quote them, and do not ask clients to post them, because a request for reviews looks like solicitation. If you are unsure whether to keep a Google Business Profile at all, ask the Ethical Standards Board.

Social media

ICAI’s 22 October 2022 advisory on the use of the “CA” designation says a member in practice may present himself as a proprietor or partner on social media if the content follows the Advertisement Guidelines, may link the firm website, and may keep a personal account, with dignity in what is posted under the CA prefix. The 2026 definition of write-up expressly covers “social Networking Websites (in Push as well as in Pull mode)”. In practice: a LinkedIn company page with services, partners and articles is fine; “Follow us for daily tax tips, like and share!” is not.

4. A compliant CA firm website, page by page

A compliant CA website has a factual home page, a services page that keeps audit and attestation pull-only, partner profiles with qualifications, permitted client names, a knowledge section, careers, contact details and a client login. It leaves out testimonials, fees, superlatives, private awards, pop-ups and banner ads.

Clause 3.3.2 says ICAI does not prescribe a format, which leaves room for good design. What ICAI does prescribe is the content. This is the page plan we now use for CA firm websites, mapped to the clauses.

Source: ICAI Code of Ethics 2026, Volume I, Chapter 3. The include and leave-out columns are Infoways’ application of the clauses; confirm with your partners before publishing.

Two more rules sit behind every page. Clause 3.3.21 says the website must not be at material variance from ICAI’s records, so the firm name, registration number, addresses and partner list must match what ICAI holds. And clause 3.3.20 says the domain name should be as close as possible to the firm’s own name and must not itself solicit work, with the Ethical Standards Board deciding any difficulty. A domain like “besttaxca.in” fails that test; your firm name does not.

The contact form also carries a newer duty. Names, phone numbers and PANs typed into it are personal data under the DPDP Act 2023. The DPDP Rules were notified on 14 November 2025 with an eighteen-month phased compliance period, and they require a clear consent notice explaining the purpose of collection, according to the PIB explainer on the Rules. A short notice under the form and a privacy page cost nothing and set the right habit early.

See also: if you are deciding what platform to build this on, read WordPress vs a custom website, and check the finished site against our on-page SEO checklist.

5. What content brings enquiries without soliciting?

Content that people search for and find on their own brings enquiries ethically: knowledge articles that answer specific questions, due-date pages kept current, simple calculators and checklists, educational videos, and a complete CA Connect listing. All of these are pull, so they work for reserved and non-exclusive services alike.

This is where the rules work in a firm’s favour. A CA website cannot shout, so it has to be useful, and useful pages are what search engines and AI assistants reward. In the CA sites we work on, the pages that bring enquiries are almost never the home page. They are pages like “documents needed for a partnership firm’s tax return” or “GSTR-1A and GSTR-3B: what to file first”, written by someone in the firm who handles that work every week.

Source: ICAI Code of Ethics 2026, Volume I; ICAI CA Connect Portal brochure. Examples and the calculator interpretation are Infoways’ own.

On CA Connect: clause 3.5 says members “are encouraged to use” it, and ICAI’s CA Connect brochure describes it as a listing of CA firms and practitioners where service seekers can search by service and office location, created because of the limits on listing through online aggregators. If your firm is not on it, that is the cheapest ethical visibility you will find.

One more point from experience. The Income-tax Act 2025 came into force on 1 April 2026 and introduced a single “tax year” with renumbered forms, while work for 2025-26 and earlier still uses the old forms. That transition is exactly the kind of confusion that sends people searching. A firm that publishes clear, correct pages on it in the next few months will be found by people who never heard of it.

See also: most CA websites also make the general mistakes we list in website mistakes that cost customers: slow pages, no clear contact details and broken mobile layouts.

6. Where a website, software and automation make compliance reliable

Software helps by storing the rules as data: client-name permissions on the client record, a service tag that marks each item exclusive or non-exclusive, newsletter tools that refuse to push reserved-service content, and a review step before anything is published. That turns ethics from memory into a setting.

Most compliance slips we see are not deliberate. A junior posts a festival greeting with a “contact us for audits” line. A newsletter template copied from a consultancy carries a “refer a friend” button. A client who left two years ago is still on the clients page. These are process failures, and process is what software is good at.

• Permission register: client names on the website come only from client records where a permission date is stored, and disappear when it is withdrawn.
• Service tags: every article, page and newsletter item is tagged reserved or non-exclusive; the email tool blocks a push send that includes reserved-service content.
• Publish workflow: a partner approves each page and post before it goes live, and the approval is kept with a date, which helps if a complaint ever arrives.
• Clean contact forms: a plain form with a DPDP consent notice, no auto-opening chat and no “free consultation” lead magnet.
• Client portal: the login permitted by clause 3.3.11 doubles as your document collection system, which is where most firms recover real staff time.

We build CA firm websites and client portals with these controls on one backend; the details are on our CA and accounting firms page. Many firms do not need anything custom for the website itself. A well-built site on a standard platform with a disciplined publishing process is enough.

See also: the portal side, checklists, reminders and status tracking, is covered in how CA firms collect client documents without chasing.

7. Where this advice breaks down

This guide is limited by three things: ICAI will not pre-approve your content, the Code does not name several modern channels, and the Ethical Standards Board can take a stricter view than mine. Where the stakes are real, ask ICAI rather than relying on any article.

• No pre-approval. Clause 3.1.1 says ICAI “will neither approve a proposed write-up, nor owns any responsibility” for its contents, and clause 3.1.4 lets ICAI direct removal of any part. The responsibility stays with the member.
• Silent areas. The Code does not mention Google Ads, SEO, Google Business Profiles or WhatsApp channels by name. My readings above are interpretations. A firm planning paid campaigns for non-exclusive services should write to the Ethical Standards Board first.
• Summaries disagree. Blog and news summaries of the 2026 changes conflict on details such as event photos. Go to the Code, not the summary.
• Facts change. The Code is updated by Council decisions. The Chapter 3 text I used is marked “updated up to December, 2025”. Check the current version on ICAI’s publication portal before a redesign.
• Interviews and articles in the press. The commentary says press interviews must not result in publicity or highlight attainments, and details should be factual answers to specific questions. A PR-style feature is a risk even if the website is clean.

I would also push back on the opposite mistake. Some firms have read the rules so cautiously that their site is a name, an address and nothing else. That was never required, and since April 2026 it is leaving useful, permitted visibility on the table.

Pre-publish compliance checklist for CA firm content

Run every page, post, video and newsletter through these questions before it goes out. If any answer is wrong, fix it or do not publish.

The partner who wanted testimonials and a WhatsApp blast ended up with a plain, factual site and a knowledge section his team writes twice a month. The enquiries now come from people who found an answer on his site first, which is the only kind of marketing the Code was ever comfortable with.