https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148532 Review under section 38(8) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act was confined to discovery of new and important facts that were not within the applicant's knowledge despite due diligence when the original order was made. A later Supreme Court decision taking a different view did not constitute a new fact and could not reopen a concluded judgment, in line with the principle under Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC. The review petition was therefore held not maintainable and dismissed. en-us Thu, 27 Mar 1969 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Apr 2013 16:19:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148532 Review under section 38(8) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act was confined to discovery of new and important facts that were not within the applicant's knowledge despite due diligence when the original order was made. A later Supreme Court decision taking a different view did not constitute a new fact and could not reopen a concluded judgment, in line with the principle under Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC. The review petition was therefore held not maintainable and dismissed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 27 Mar 1969 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=148532