TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the delay in filing the review petitions should be condoned and whether any ground for review was made out.
Analysis: The application sought condonation of delay of 167 days in filing the review petitions. On a consideration of the earlier order and the record, no ground warranting review was found. The petitions were therefore liable to fail both on account of delay and on merits.
Conclusion: The application for condonation of delay was rejected and the review petitions were dismissed.
Ratio Decidendi: A review petition will not be entertained when the delay is not condoned and no reviewable error or sufficient ground for review is shown.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
