Right to practice under Income Tax Act vs section 33 of Advocates Act

[shantanu]

After the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High court in "Lawyers collective " the Right to practise in Litigious and Non Litigious matters may now be confined to persons practising the profession of law under the Advocates Act 1961. This plainly implies that practising under tax laws is not an exception. Apart from Lawyers various other categories of persons including C.A's, ITP's etc are in substantial number and manner, practising in both the Non litigious and Litigious matters before Tax Authorities and Tribunals.

Section 33 of the Advocates act while restricting the scope of practice to Advocates alone provides exception in two cases, one, otherwise provided in the Advocate Act itself and second otherwise provided in any other law for the time being in force. Persons who are eligible to act as Authorised representative before Income Tax Authorities and Tribunal are prescribed in section 288 of the I.T.Act. Thus section 288 of the I.T.Act may prevail over the provisions of section 33 of the Advocates Act so far as the practice of Income Tax Law is concerned by virtue of the exception provided therein.

New Direct Tax Code intends to repeal the Act of 1961. In the Direct Tax Code too there is analogous provision under the proposed section 270 of the code but the issue arises whether the Direct Tax code when enacted would qualify to be termed as "  otherwise provided in any other law for the time being in force" under section 33 of the Advocates Act of 1961

[CA.BHUPENDRASHAH]

 ???
Dear Sirs,
Does this judgement of Bombay High Court mention anything about provisions of I Tax ACt so far as persons authorised thereunder is concerned ?
bhupendra shah