DEEPAK R SHAH vs. INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL - AHMEDABAD BENCH

Facts

The petitioner, Deepak R. Shah, an advocate and former Accountant Member of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), filed a Special Civil Application before the High Court of Gujarat. The core of the matter was a reference to a Special Bench of the ITAT, constituted on May 27, 2011, to decide whether the petitioner was debarred from practicing before the ITAT due to the insertion of Rule 13E in the ITAT (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1963. The Special Bench heard the matter on January 20, 2012, but did not pronounce its decision. Subsequently, one of the members of the Special Bench retired. The petitioner sought a direction for the re-constitution of the Special Bench and a decision within a stipulated period.

Held

The High Court, without entering into the merits of the case, disposed of the Special Civil Application at the request of the petitioner and his advocate. The Court directed the respondents (ITAT) to re-constitute the Special Bench to decide the reference concerning the petitioner's right to practice before the ITAT. This re-constitution, hearing, and disposal were to be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the Court's order. The petitioner, in light of these directions, did not press his petition. All contentions of the parties were kept open, and the Court explicitly stated it had not examined the merits of the matter.

Key Issues

1. Whether Shri Deepak R. Shah, advocate and ex-Accountant Member of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, is debarred from practising before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in view of the insertion of Rule 13E in the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Members (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1963? (Question of law and fact, concerning Rule 13E of the ITAT Rules, 1963). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner, through his advocate and in person, requested the Court to direct the ITAT to re-constitute the Special Bench, as one member had retired, and to decide the reference afresh within three months. Revenue's Contention: The respondent (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) did not object to the petitioner's request for re-constitution and a fresh decision within a stipulated period. Shri Syed also submitted that intervening circumstances, such as amendments by the Bar Council, needed to be considered.