Co-operative society's mandatory reserve and share capital fixed deposits with banks-interest treated as business income under 80P(2)(a)(iii) deductio...
Income tax reassessment reopening after four years on investigation tip, without s.147 proviso disclosure failure, struck down as borrowed satisfactio...
Sanction for prosecution of a public servant must be granted by the authority competent to remove the officer; a sanction accorded by a subordinate authority is a jurisdictional defect, rendering the sanction void ab initio and necessitating discharge, which was accordingly upheld and proceedings terminated. The statutory requirement in Section 19(1)(c) of the PC Act is anchored in the constitutional safeguard of Article 311(1), and departmental circulars cannot cure the defect; the curative principle is inapplicable where a superior legal impediment exists (withdrawal of general consent), so no fresh sanction could sustain the prosecution.
Sanction for prosecution of a public servant must be granted by the authority competent to remove the officer; a sanction accorded by a subordinate authority is a jurisdictional defect, rendering the sanction void ab initio and necessitating discharge, which was accordingly upheld and proceedings terminated. The statutory requirement in Section 19(1)(c) of the PC Act is anchored in the constitutional safeguard of Article 311(1), and departmental circulars cannot cure the defect; the curative principle is inapplicable where a superior legal impediment exists (withdrawal of general consent), so no fresh sanction could sustain the prosecution.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.