https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198412 Review jurisdiction cannot be used to reopen issues already decided or to substitute one possible view for another; it is confined to correcting a clear error apparent on the face of the record. The earlier proceedings had already determined the substantive liability to market fee and the effect of the Supreme Court's prospective ruling, and no legal infirmity or apparent error was shown. The High Court was therefore justified in refusing to interfere with the direction that the deposited amount be paid to the Market Committee, and the challenge to the dismissal of review failed. en-us Wed, 09 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Jan 2018 18:26:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198412 Review jurisdiction cannot be used to reopen issues already decided or to substitute one possible view for another; it is confined to correcting a clear error apparent on the face of the record. The earlier proceedings had already determined the substantive liability to market fee and the effect of the Supreme Court's prospective ruling, and no legal infirmity or apparent error was shown. The High Court was therefore justified in refusing to interfere with the direction that the deposited amount be paid to the Market Committee, and the challenge to the dismissal of review failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 09 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198412