https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373191 Review jurisdiction under Section 114 and Order 47 Rule 1 CPC is confined to a patent, self-evident error on the face of the record or other limited recognised grounds. A review cannot be used as a substitute for appeal, nor to obtain a rehearing by reappreciating evidence or revisiting the merits merely because another view is possible. The Madhya Pradesh High Court noted that no apparent error was shown and that the petition in substance sought reconsideration of the earlier order's merits. No ground for review was made out, and the petition was liable to be dismissed. en-us Fri, 04 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Jan 2019 18:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373191 Review jurisdiction under Section 114 and Order 47 Rule 1 CPC is confined to a patent, self-evident error on the face of the record or other limited recognised grounds. A review cannot be used as a substitute for appeal, nor to obtain a rehearing by reappreciating evidence or revisiting the merits merely because another view is possible. The Madhya Pradesh High Court noted that no apparent error was shown and that the petition in substance sought reconsideration of the earlier order's merits. No ground for review was made out, and the petition was liable to be dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 04 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373191