https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12737 Review jurisdiction was confined to correcting an obvious typographical error in the earlier order, and the percentage reference was amended from 50 per cent to 15 per cent. The request for broader modification, including a declaration that the Department was bound to purchase the property because the sale price was below market value, was rejected because pre-emptive purchase under the statutory scheme is not automatic and depends on good reason to acquire the property. The prayer to implead the Income-tax Department was also declined, as it disclosed no error apparent on the face of the record. The review power could not be used to reopen the merits or grant substantive relief. en-us Fri, 07 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 May 2009 16:42:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12737 Review jurisdiction was confined to correcting an obvious typographical error in the earlier order, and the percentage reference was amended from 50 per cent to 15 per cent. The request for broader modification, including a declaration that the Department was bound to purchase the property because the sale price was below market value, was rejected because pre-emptive purchase under the statutory scheme is not automatic and depends on good reason to acquire the property. The prayer to implead the Income-tax Department was also declined, as it disclosed no error apparent on the face of the record. The review power could not be used to reopen the merits or grant substantive relief. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 07 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12737