https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14793 The court dismissed the petitions for want of territorial jurisdiction at Allahabad but allowed the petitioners to file fresh petitions before the Lucknow Bench if no other legal impediment existed. The court emphasized that the cause of action arose where the impugned order was passed and that the grant of "previous approval" at Kanpur was irrelevant in establishing the cause of action. The analysis focused on the legality and validity of the order dated January 24, 1997, under section 142(2A) of the Income-tax Act, emphasizing the importance of prior approval and compliance with statutory requirements. en-us Wed, 06 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Jul 2009 16:50:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14793 The court dismissed the petitions for want of territorial jurisdiction at Allahabad but allowed the petitioners to file fresh petitions before the Lucknow Bench if no other legal impediment existed. The court emphasized that the cause of action arose where the impugned order was passed and that the grant of "previous approval" at Kanpur was irrelevant in establishing the cause of action. The analysis focused on the legality and validity of the order dated January 24, 1997, under section 142(2A) of the Income-tax Act, emphasizing the importance of prior approval and compliance with statutory requirements. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 06 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14793