https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200343 The Supreme Court held that a prosecution sanction validly approved by the competent authority is not vitiated by minor clerical corrections in a later corrigendum. The Finance Minister had accorded approval after the matter moved through normal administrative channels, and the earlier file notings did not show any refusal of sanction or any extraneous influence. The corrigendum only corrected typographical matters, split the demand into two amounts, and removed some penal provisions, which was beneficial to the accused and did not alter the sanction's substratum. Allegations of prejudice were treated as factual matters ordinarily for trial, not for quashing at the threshold. The High Court's interference was therefore set aside and the prosecution was allowed to continue. en-us Wed, 18 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Mar 2018 15:03:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200343 The Supreme Court held that a prosecution sanction validly approved by the competent authority is not vitiated by minor clerical corrections in a later corrigendum. The Finance Minister had accorded approval after the matter moved through normal administrative channels, and the earlier file notings did not show any refusal of sanction or any extraneous influence. The corrigendum only corrected typographical matters, split the demand into two amounts, and removed some penal provisions, which was beneficial to the accused and did not alter the sanction's substratum. Allegations of prejudice were treated as factual matters ordinarily for trial, not for quashing at the threshold. The High Court's interference was therefore set aside and the prosecution was allowed to continue. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 18 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200343