9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Application under section 66(3) of the Income-tax Act; Correctness of the order of the Appellate Tribunal rejecting an application under section 66(1) on the ground of limitation; Authority to sign the application for reference under section 66(1) of the Act.
Analysis: The judgment deals with an application by the assessee under section 66(3) of the Income-tax Act, challenging the order of the Appellate Tribunal rejecting an application under section 66(1) on the basis of being time-barred. The Tribunal rejected the application as it was filed thirty-seven days beyond the sixty-day period provided by section 66(1). The key issue was whether the advocate who filed the vakalat in the rectification proceeding had the authority to sign the application for reference under section 66(1) of the Act. The Tribunal held that the advocate did not have the necessary authority to sign the application. The High Court referred to previous decisions by different benches to establish the legal position. It cited a Division Bench of the Madras High Court and a Division Bench of the same High Court, which held that it was not necessary for an application under section 66(1) to be signed by both the assessee and the advocate. It was sufficient for either the assessee or the authorized representative to sign the application. This principle was followed by the High Court in the present case. The Court analyzed the contents of the vakalat filed by the advocate in the rectification proceeding and found that it provided comprehensive authority to the advocate to appear in all proceedings connected with the same matter. The Court concluded that the application for reference under section 66(1) was not unconnected with the rectification proceeding and fell within the scope of the authority granted in the vakalat. Therefore, the Court held that the order of the Appellate Tribunal was unsustainable and directed the Tribunal to treat the application as made within the required time under section 66(1) and dispose of it in accordance with the law. No costs were awarded in this matter. In conclusion, the High Court allowed the petition, emphasizing the importance of the authority granted in the vakalat and the relevance of previous legal precedents in determining the validity of the application for reference under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act.
|
