https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101861 Review jurisdiction is confined to patent error, glaring omission, or error apparent on the face of the record, and cannot be used to re-argue the merits or reopen finality merely because another view is possible. The court therefore treated the review petitions as not maintainable on merits. In sales tax matters involving restaurant meals, the earlier ruling was confined to its facts: where the dominant object is a sale of food, and services are only incidental, the transaction remains taxable. Taxability must be determined on the substance of each transaction and assessment. en-us Thu, 21 Dec 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 May 2014 17:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101861 Review jurisdiction is confined to patent error, glaring omission, or error apparent on the face of the record, and cannot be used to re-argue the merits or reopen finality merely because another view is possible. The court therefore treated the review petitions as not maintainable on merits. In sales tax matters involving restaurant meals, the earlier ruling was confined to its facts: where the dominant object is a sale of food, and services are only incidental, the transaction remains taxable. Taxability must be determined on the substance of each transaction and assessment. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 21 Dec 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101861