Law:

Section:

Section 288 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with rule 51 of Income-tax Rules, 1962 - Authorised representative - Appearance by - Whether when rule 51 does not draw any distinction between a degree in law (Academic) and a degree in law (Professional), only requirement being that a person should possess a degree in commerce or law, person possessing a degree in law (Academic) would be entitled to appear and practice before income-tax authorities - Held, yes FACTS Respondent No. 5, holding a degree in law (Academic) was permitted to practise and appear as authorised income-tax practitioner. On writ, the petitioner contended that respondent No. 5 having passed only LL.B (Academic) did not possess a degree in law; that the professional degree of 3 years obtained by regular students was the only degree equated to a degree of law, and that the academic degree obtained as a private candidate did not even entitle him to seek admission to L.L.B. (Professional) Part III. HELD Rule 51 did not draw any distinction between a degree of law (Academic) and a degree of law (Professional). The only requirement of the rule was that a person should possess a degree in commerce or law. In this situation, respondent No. 5, who was conferred a degree of law, was entitled to practice before the income-tax authorities. The petition was dismissed in limine. Note: The case was decided against the petitioner. JUDGMENT The Taxation Bar Association, Hoshiarpur, through its President, Shri Y. M. Mohindra, advocate, has filed this petition for the quashing of the order, dated 9/14th June, 1982, and 21st May, 1982, copies annexs. P-6 and P-7 to the petition. Shri Harish Chander Aery, respondent No. 5, has been permitted to practice and appear as authorised income-tax practitioner. It is this permission of the authorities which has been challenged by the Taxation Bar Association on the ground that respondent No. 5 is not eligible to practice. Notice of motion was issued to the respondents. Separate written statements on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 and 4, 2 and 5 have been filed. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and find no merit in this petition. Section 288(2) of the I.T.…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492