Communication to authorised counsel satisfied section 254(3), so re-service of the tribunal order was not required.

Communication of an ITAT order to an assessee's authorised counsel was treated as sufficient compliance with section 254(3) where the assessee had named that counsel for communications and the order was actually received by counsel. The Tribunal distinguished authorities relied on by the assessee as involving limitation issues or different factual settings, and held that the statutory object of communication had been met on the admitted facts. No further direction to re-serve the order on the assessee was warranted, and the miscellaneous petition therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether communication of the Tribunal's order to the assessee's authorised counsel amounted to compliance with section 254(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and whether a further direction could be issued to serve the order again on the assessee.

Analysis: The assessee had described its counsel in the memorandum of appeal as the person to whom communications could be made, and the order had in fact been received by the counsel. The assessee thereafter pursued writ proceedings before the High Court instead of promptly seeking the reference remedy. The earlier writ proceedings left open only a request to the Tribunal to examine the matter on facts and in accordance with law, but the Tribunal found that the statutory object of section 254(3) was satisfied on the facts. The authorities cited by the assessee were distinguished because they concerned limitation for reference applications or different factual settings where service on the representative was not treated as sufficient.

Conclusion: Communication of the order to the assessee's authorised counsel was held to be sufficient compliance with section 254(3), and no further direction for re-service on the assessee was warranted.

Final Conclusion: The miscellaneous petition failed because the Tribunal found the statutory requirement of communication satisfied on the admitted facts, leaving no basis for the requested relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an assessee has designated its counsel for communications and the Tribunal's order has been received by that counsel, the statutory requirement of communication under section 254(3) stands complied with.

---