https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195801 Review jurisdiction under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC was confined to correcting an error apparent on the face of the record, not to re-arguing matters already decided. The Court treated the petitioner's objections about confiscation, the revision order, and possible consequences in other proceedings as a repetition of earlier submissions. It also noted that the revision order had attained finality because no further challenge was pursued. Any incidental prejudice in proposed proceedings under Section 482 CrPC, Section 130A Customs Act, or Section 127B Customs Act did not itself establish reviewable error. The review petition was therefore rejected and the earlier judgment remained undisturbed. en-us Sat, 24 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Nov 2017 17:56:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195801 Review jurisdiction under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC was confined to correcting an error apparent on the face of the record, not to re-arguing matters already decided. The Court treated the petitioner's objections about confiscation, the revision order, and possible consequences in other proceedings as a repetition of earlier submissions. It also noted that the revision order had attained finality because no further challenge was pursued. Any incidental prejudice in proposed proceedings under Section 482 CrPC, Section 130A Customs Act, or Section 127B Customs Act did not itself establish reviewable error. The review petition was therefore rejected and the earlier judgment remained undisturbed. Case-Laws Customs Sat, 24 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195801