IMPORTANT POINT
There is nothing in the provisions of the Bombay Sales Tax Act or the rules framed thereunder to suggest that the right of appearance before a sales tax authority amounts to entitlement to practise the profession of law as contemplated by clause (aa) of Sub-section (3) of Section 24 of the Advocates Act.

Headnote:Advocates Act, 1961-Sub-section (3)(aa) of Section 24-Entitlement to be enrolled as an Advocate-Appellant does not have a degree in law-He claims that he was appearing in sales tax matters under Bombay Sales Tax Act-Whether appellant is entitled to be enrolled as an advocate by virtue of provisions of Clause (aa) of Sub-section (3) of Section 24 of the Act?-(No).
       Held : A large number of persons have been permitted to appear before sales tax authorities on behalf of the dealers. The list includes an employee, a relative, a sales tax practitioner and also professionally qualified people like lawyers and accountants. The right to appear before a sales tax authority is not confined to lawyers only. We are unable to uphold the contention that merely because the appellant has been permitted to appear before the sales tax authority, he falls within the category of persons entitled to practice the profession of law by virtue of the provisions of the Bombay Sales Tax Act. (Para 7)
       Further held, appearance before the sales tax authority may only be for the purpose of filing a return and producing documents in support of the return. A relative or an employee or an accountant or a sales tax practitioner can be asked to do this job by an assessee for and on his behalf. That does not mean that any one of the aforesaid persons is practising the profession of law when he appears before the statutory authority and produces the accounts. He may even be called upon to explain the accounts of justify the entries made in the accounts books. There may be problems only of book-keeping and accountancy and nothing of law in such proceedings. Therefore, it cannot be inferred straightaway that because the sales tax practitioner has been given a right to appear before a statutory authority, he is practising the profession of law. (Para 8)
       Consequently held that apart from lawyers and chartered or cost accountants, other persons are allowed to practise in the Sales Tax Department as Sales tax practitioner provided they have acquired some knowledge of accountancy. They will have to pass one of the many recognised accountancy courses for this purpose. This goes to show that the sales tax practitioner does not carry on the profession of law when he appears before a Sales Tax Officer. His practice is more in the nature of that of an accountant. Therefore, we are unable to uphold the contention that merely because the appellant was allowed to practise as a sales tax practitioner, he is entitled to be enrolled as an advocate by virtue of the provision of Clause (aa) of Sub-section (3) of Section 24 of the Act. (Para 11)
       Finally held that there is nothing in the provisions of the Bombay Sales Tax Act or the rules framed thereunder to suggest that the right of appearance before a sales tax authority amounts to entitlement to practise the profession of law as contemplated by Clause (aa) of Sub-section (3) of Section 24 of the Advocates Act. (Para 13)

JUDGMENT

Sen, J.-The appellant claims that he was a Sales Tax Practitioner in 1949 when the Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947 was in force in the State of Madhya Pradesh and, thereafter, he continued his practice in sales tax matters at Nagpur under the provisions of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. The appellant claimed that when the Advocates Act, 1961 came into force, he was entitled to be enrolled as an Advocate by the Bar Council of Maharashtra.

2. It has been contended by Mr. Ganpule appearing on behalf of the appellant, that the appellant was entitled to be enrolled as an Advocate by virtue of the provisions of Sub-section (3)(aa) of Section 24 of the Advocates Act, 1961. There is no dispute that he does not have a degree in law or for that matter any degree, but he is a person who was entitled to practise the profession of law before 1st December, 1961 by virtue of the provisions of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. Therefore, his right to be enrolled as an advocate could not be denied.

3. We shall have to examine whether the appellant s case comes within the provisions of Sub-section (3) (aa) of Section 24 of the Advocates Act to justify the claim made by Mr. Ganpule. Sub-section (1) of Section 24 lays down the qualifications which must be acquired by a person who wants to be admitted as an advocate on a State roll. Sub-section (2) provides that notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-section (1) a vakil or a a pleader who is a law graduate may be admitted as an advocate under certain circumstances. Sub-section (3) deals with cases of persons who do not fall either under Sub-section (1) or (2). Sub-section (3) of Section 24 is as under :

"24(3). Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-section (1), a person who-

(a) has, for at least three years, been vakil or a pleader or a mukhtar, or was entitled at any time to be enrolled under any law as an advocate of a High Court (including a High Court or a former Part B State) or of a Court of Judicial Commissioner in any Union territory; or

(aa) before the 1st day of December, 1961, was entitled otherwise than as an advocate to practise the profession of law (whether by way of pleading or acting or both) by virtue of the provisions of any law, or who would have been so entitled had he not been in public service on the said date; or

(b) ... ... ...

4. Since the appellant s claim is confined to clause (aa) of Sub-section (3), it will have to be examined whether he was entitled, to practise the profession of law by virtue of the provisions of any law before 1st day of December, 1961. The appellant s case that he was appearing in sales tax matters before sales tax authority under Bombay Sales Tax Act has not been disputed. But that does not mean he was practising the profession of law. Section 71 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 empowers not only legal practitioners but many other persons to appear before a sales tax authority. Section 71 provides :-

"71. Appearance before any authority in proceedings : (1) Any person, who is entitled or required to attend before any authority in connection with any proceeding under this Act, may attend -

(a) by a relative or a person regularly employed by him, or

(b) by legal practitioner or Chartered Accountant or Cost Accountant, who is not disqualified by or under Sub-section (2), or

(c) by a sales tax practitioner who possesses the prescribed qualifications and is entered in the list, which the Commissioner shall maintain in that behalf, and who is not disqualified by or under Sub-section (2).

If such relative, person employed, legal practitioner, Chartered Accountant, Cost Accountant or Sales tax practitioner is authorised by such person in the prescribed form, and such

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

1996 Supreme(SC) 728

1996(3) Supreme 643SUPREME COURT OF INDIAJ.S. Verma, Suhas C. Sen & S.B. Majmudar, JJ.L.M. Mahurkar -AppellantversusBar Council of Maharashtra & Anr. -RespondentsCivil Appeal No. 4797 of 1984Decided on 8-4-1996

Judicial Analysis

1996(3) Supreme 643
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.S. Verma, Suhas C. Sen & S.B. Majmudar, JJ.
L.M. Mahurkar -Appellant
versus
Bar Council of Maharashtra & Anr. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 4797 of 1984
Decided on 8-4-1996