https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394853 Sanction for prosecution under the Income-tax Act must be an independent exercise of statutory discretion by the competent authority. Where the Commissioner of Income Tax first sought and obtained prior approval from the Chief Commissioner before issuing sanction under Section 279, the Commissioner's satisfaction was not independent and the process did not reflect a proper application of mind by the approving authority. Since the statutory scheme did not require such prior approval, the sanction procedure was held to be inconsistent with Section 279. The sanction order and the resulting criminal prosecution under Section 276CC were therefore invalid and quashed. en-us Mon, 24 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Apr 2020 11:37:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394853 Sanction for prosecution under the Income-tax Act must be an independent exercise of statutory discretion by the competent authority. Where the Commissioner of Income Tax first sought and obtained prior approval from the Chief Commissioner before issuing sanction under Section 279, the Commissioner's satisfaction was not independent and the process did not reflect a proper application of mind by the approving authority. Since the statutory scheme did not require such prior approval, the sanction procedure was held to be inconsistent with Section 279. The sanction order and the resulting criminal prosecution under Section 276CC were therefore invalid and quashed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 24 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394853