https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332247 Refusal to extend approval under Section 35(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act was upheld because the approval process was shown to have followed the Government of India (Transaction of Business) Rules, 1961. The initial approval had been granted by the Minister and conveyed by the Director, and the later decision not to extend it had been approved by the prescribed authority. Since the appellant's material on compliance with Rule 3 remained uncontroverted, the High Court's view that the order was invalid merely because it was passed by the Director was unsustainable. The challenge on want of competence therefore failed, and the refusal to extend approval was held valid. en-us Fri, 02 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Feb 2017 17:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332247 Refusal to extend approval under Section 35(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act was upheld because the approval process was shown to have followed the Government of India (Transaction of Business) Rules, 1961. The initial approval had been granted by the Minister and conveyed by the Director, and the later decision not to extend it had been approved by the prescribed authority. Since the appellant's material on compliance with Rule 3 remained uncontroverted, the High Court's view that the order was invalid merely because it was passed by the Director was unsustainable. The challenge on want of competence therefore failed, and the refusal to extend approval was held valid. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 02 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332247