https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186358 A prosecution sanction was upheld where the sanction order itself recited the relevant allegations, the check period, known sources of income, expenditure, assets acquired, and the resulting disproportionate assets. The sanctioning authority also testified that he had considered the CBI report and consulted the legal department before granting approval. On that basis, the sanction was not a mechanical exercise and there was due application of mind. The objection that the material had not been properly placed before the authority failed, and the trial court's contrary finding was held erroneous. en-us Tue, 29 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 May 2024 11:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186358 A prosecution sanction was upheld where the sanction order itself recited the relevant allegations, the check period, known sources of income, expenditure, assets acquired, and the resulting disproportionate assets. The sanctioning authority also testified that he had considered the CBI report and consulted the legal department before granting approval. On that basis, the sanction was not a mechanical exercise and there was due application of mind. The objection that the material had not been properly placed before the authority failed, and the trial court's contrary finding was held erroneous. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 29 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186358