Substantive review requires express statutory power; procedural appeal provisions do not by themselves permit review under tax law.

Section 260A(7) of the Income-tax Act applies the procedural provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure to High Court appeals, but it does not itself confer a substantive power of review. The Court distinguished between limited procedural correction of clerical or accidental errors and a merits-based review, holding that the latter requires express statutory authority. A coordinate Bench view that no substantive review power exists under the same enactment was followed, and contrary authority under different statutes was not accepted as a basis to depart from it. Review under section 260A(7) was therefore held not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether review of an order passed in an appeal under section 260A(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is maintainable.

Analysis: Section 260A(7) makes the procedural provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 applicable to appeals to the High Court only so far as may be. The provision was read as incorporating the appellate procedure contained in the Code, not as conferring a substantive power of review. The distinction between procedural review and substantive review was applied: procedural correction of clerical, accidental, or inadvertent errors may be inherent, but review on merits requires express statutory conferment. A coordinate Bench decision holding that no power of substantive review is available under the same enactment was treated as binding, and contrary views under different enactments were not accepted as a basis to depart from it.

Conclusion: Review under section 260A(7) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is not maintainable in the absence of an express conferment of substantive review power.

Final Conclusion: The Court held that the Revenue could not invoke section 260A(7) to seek review of the earlier tax appellate orders, and the review applications therefore failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Procedural provisions applicable to appeals do not, by themselves, confer a substantive power of review; such a power must be expressly provided by statute.

---