https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391884 Review jurisdiction is confined to an error apparent on the face of the record or another legally sufficient ground of similar character under Section 114 and Order 47 Rule 1 CPC. It cannot be used to reopen the merits, reappreciate evidence, or seek a rehearing merely because another view is possible. Applying that standard, the High Court found no patent mistake or obvious error in the earlier order disposing of the income-tax appeal. The attempt was treated as a merits challenge rather than a proper review ground, so no basis for review was established and the petition failed. en-us Thu, 23 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Jul 2021 18:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391884 Review jurisdiction is confined to an error apparent on the face of the record or another legally sufficient ground of similar character under Section 114 and Order 47 Rule 1 CPC. It cannot be used to reopen the merits, reappreciate evidence, or seek a rehearing merely because another view is possible. Applying that standard, the High Court found no patent mistake or obvious error in the earlier order disposing of the income-tax appeal. The attempt was treated as a merits challenge rather than a proper review ground, so no basis for review was established and the petition failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 23 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391884