Review in income-tax reference not maintainable where CPC review provisions could not apply to the earlier judgment.

Review in an income-tax reference was held not maintainable because no rule of law supported reopening the earlier judgment on the basis of the alleged notice-period discrepancy. The HC also held that even if the Civil Procedure Code were treated as applicable through Section 66-A of the Income-tax Act, the review provision could not apply, since the earlier judgment was neither a decree nor an order within the relevant procedural meaning. The application was dismissed with costs.

---

---

Issues: Whether an application for review was maintainable in respect of the earlier judgment in an income-tax reference and whether the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code could be invoked to sustain such review.

Analysis: The challenge was based on the contention that the judgment could be reopened because the notice period stated in the case record was said to be different from what had been assumed earlier. The Court held that no rule of law supported entertaining a review application in these circumstances. It further held that, even assuming the Civil Procedure Code applied to income-tax cases through Section 66-A of the Income-tax Act, the review provision could not assist because the earlier judgment was neither a decree nor an order within the meaning of the relevant procedural provision.

Conclusion: The application for review was held to be not maintainable and was dismissed with costs.

---