<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (7) TMI 1318 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193771</link>
    <description>A sanctioning authority may reconsider an earlier refusal of sanction for prosecution only if later action is supported by relevant fresh material and a conscious application of mind. An earlier refusal does not create an absolute bar to reconsideration, but mere repetition of the request or a change of Government is insufficient. On the record, no fresh material justified reopening the earlier decision, which had already been taken after considering the relevant records. The subsequent grant of sanction was therefore unsustainable, and the High Court&#039;s interference with that later sanction order remained undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2017 18:14:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=485825" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (7) TMI 1318 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193771</link>
      <description>A sanctioning authority may reconsider an earlier refusal of sanction for prosecution only if later action is supported by relevant fresh material and a conscious application of mind. An earlier refusal does not create an absolute bar to reconsideration, but mere repetition of the request or a change of Government is insufficient. On the record, no fresh material justified reopening the earlier decision, which had already been taken after considering the relevant records. The subsequent grant of sanction was therefore unsustainable, and the High Court&#039;s interference with that later sanction order remained undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193771</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>