L.M. MAHURKAR versus THE BAR COUNCIL OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

Citation: [1996] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 85 · Decided: 08-04-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: J.S. VERMA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

L.M. MAHURKAR 
A 
v. 
THE BAR COUNCIL OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. 
APR! L 8, 1996 
[.l.S. VERMA, S.C. SEN AND S.B. MAJUMDAR, JJ.] 
B 
Advocates Act, 1961-Section 24(3)(aaf--Appearance before Sales Tax 
Authority prior to enactment of Advocates Act-Denial of enrolment as all 
advocate after enactment of Advocates Act-Appearance before Sales Tax 
Auth01ity--Whether amounts to practise the profession of /aw-Held, the 
C 
Bombay Sales Tax Act and the Rules do not suggest that the appearance 
before Sales Tax Auth01ity amounts to e11titleme11t to practise the profession 
of law as contemplated by Advocates Act. 
Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959-Section 71-Bombay Sales Tax D 
Rules-Rule 66-Appearance before Sales Tax Autlwrity p1ior to enactment 
of Advocates Act-Enrolment as a11 Advocate denied after enactment of 
Advocates Act-Appearance before Sales Tax Auth01ity--Whether amounts 
to practise the profession of law-Held, ap(JJ1; from legal practitioner many 
other persons empowered to appear before Sales Tax Authority-Clem· dis-
tinction has been drawn between legal practitioner and sales tax prac-
E 
titioner-Hence, niere appearance would not tum a sales tax practitioner into 
a legal practitioner. 
Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1961-Section 286. 
Appellant, a matriculate, not having degree of law & not passed any F 
accountancy examinations, was a Sales Tax Practitioner under provisions 
of Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. On enactment or Advocates Act, 1961, he 
was denied enrolment as an Advocate by the Bar Council. 
He filed a writ petition before High Court claiming to be enrolled as G 
an Advocate which was dismissed. 
In appeal to this court the appellant contended that he was entitled 
to be enrolled as an Advocate by virtue of the provisions of Section 
24(3)(aa) Adv<:ates Act, 1961, as he was entitled to practise the profession 
of law before 1st December, 1%1 by virtue of the provisions of the Bombay H 
8~ 
. 
86 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. l S.C.R. 
A 
Sales Tax Act, 1959. 
B 
c 
D 
E 
Dismissing the appeal, this Court 
Held : 1.1. 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 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. (93-A] 
1.2. 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. A distinction has been drawn between a legal practitioner and 
a Sales Tax practitioner in Section 71. Both may appear before an 
authority in connection with Sales Tax Cases. That will not turn a Sales 
Tax practitioner into a legal practitioner. (89-G-HJ 
1.3. Rule 66 of Bombay Sales Tax Rules goes to show that apart from 
· lawyers and chartered and cost accountants, other persons are allowed to 
practise in the Sales Tax Department as Sales Tax Practitioners, provided 
they have acquired some knowledge of accountancy. They will have to pass 
one of the many recognized accountancy courses for this purpose. This 
goes to show that Sales Tax practitioner does not carry on the profession 
of law, when he appears before a Sales Tax Officer. This practice is more 
in the nature of that of an accountant. (92-G-H; 93-A) 
1.4. The category, to which the appellant claims to belong, is the 
category of Sales Tax practitioners, who possess lhe prescribed qualifica-
F 
!ions. Assuming that the appellant, who is stated (o be only a matriculate, 
bas acquired the prescribed qualifications and has' been included in the list 
of persons qualified to appear before the Sales Tax Authorities, he cannot 
be treated as a person entitled to practise either the profession of law or the 
profession of accountancy. A large number of persons have been permitted 
G to appear before Sales Tax authorities on behalf of the dealers. The list 
includes an employee, a relative, a Sales Tax practitioner and also profes-
sionally qualified people like lawyers and accountants. The right to appear 
before the Sales Tax authority is not confined to lawyers only. (90-D-F] 
1.5. After passing of the Advocate Act, only one class of persons i.s 
H entitled to practise the profession of law, namely, advocates (section 29). 
• 
' 
L.M. MAHURKAR v. BAR COUNCIL OF MAHARASHTRA [SEN, J.] 87 
If the phrase 'practice the profession of law,' is equated to appear

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.