9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (8) TMI 93X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Income-tax Act, 1961 ?" The respondent is a registered firm. We are concerned with the assessment year 1977-78. The only question that arises for consideration is whether the addition of Rs. 1,00,000 made to the trading results is valid and justified in law. The addition was made stating that the assessee agreed to the disallowance of a total sum of Rs. 1,00,000 in the profit and loss account. It seems that one Mr. T. K. Gopalan Nair, who was stated to be the financial adviser of the assessee-firm, appeared before the Income-tax Officer and signed on a sheet of paper agreeing to the disallowance of Rs. 1,00,000. The assessee pleaded that Mr. Gopalan Nair, aforesaid, was neither authorised to represent the assessee, nor had he informed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct states as follows "288. (1) Any assessee who is entitled or required to attend before any income-tax authority or the Appellate Tribunal in connection with any proceeding under this Act otherwise than when required under section 131 to attend personally for examination on oath or affirmation, may, subject to the other provisions of this section, attend by an authorised representative. (2) For the purposes of this section, "authorised representative" means a person authorised by the assessee in writing to appear on his behalf, being (i) a person related to the assessee in any manner, or a person regularly employed by the assessee ; or (ii) any officer of a scheduled bank with which the assessee maintains a current account or has oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an offence connected with any income-tax proceeding or on whom a penalty has been imposed under this Act, other than a penalty imposed on him under section 271 ; or (c) who has become an insolvent, shall be qualified to represent an assessee under sub-section (1) for all times in the case of a person referred to in clause (a), for such time as the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner may by order determine in the case of a person referred to in clause (b), and for the period during which the insolvency continues in the case of a person referred to in clause (c). (5) If any person (a) who is a legal practitioner or an accountant is found guilty of misconduct in his professional capacity by any authority entitled to institute disciplinar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Mr. T. K. Gopalan Nair was authorised in writing to represent the assessee before the assessing authority. As a final fact-finding authority, the Appellate Tribunal has found that no such authorisation by the assessee in favour of Mr. T. K. Gopalan Nair ever existed, nor was any material shown before the Tribunal to justify that Mr. T. K. Gopalan Nair was in fact an authorised agent. There was no entry in the order sheet on the relevant date to show that Mr. T. K. Gopalan Nair acted as the authorised agent of the assessee. Whether Mr. T. K. Gopalan Nair was authorised by the assessee to represent it is a question of fact. Section 288 of the Income-tax Act requires the authorisation to be in writing. No such writing was ever produced in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
