https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343877 Review jurisdiction was unavailable where a common judgment had already finally determined the connected writ appeals and unchallenged adverse findings in remaining appeals continued to operate. The court held that review is confined to an error apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to reopen binding findings or bypass the effect of res judicata. The plea of discrimination was already considered in the earlier judgment, and any challenge to the correctness of that reasoning was a matter for appeal, not review. The review petitions were therefore not maintainable and were liable to be rejected. en-us Tue, 28 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Nov 2017 17:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343877 Review jurisdiction was unavailable where a common judgment had already finally determined the connected writ appeals and unchallenged adverse findings in remaining appeals continued to operate. The court held that review is confined to an error apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to reopen binding findings or bypass the effect of res judicata. The plea of discrimination was already considered in the earlier judgment, and any challenge to the correctness of that reasoning was a matter for appeal, not review. The review petitions were therefore not maintainable and were liable to be rejected. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 28 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343877