https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286177 Review jurisdiction is confined to correcting an error apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to reargue the merits or reopen issues already considered. The court found no ground to review the earlier judgment on the alleged improper additions or disallowance because the relevant law and facts had been considered and the questions had been answered in favour of the Revenue. It also declined review on monetary limit and limitation, as those contentions had not been raised earlier before the hearing or statutory authorities. The review petition was dismissed and the earlier decision left undisturbed. en-us Mon, 29 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 Feb 2020 20:00:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286177 Review jurisdiction is confined to correcting an error apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to reargue the merits or reopen issues already considered. The court found no ground to review the earlier judgment on the alleged improper additions or disallowance because the relevant law and facts had been considered and the questions had been answered in favour of the Revenue. It also declined review on monetary limit and limitation, as those contentions had not been raised earlier before the hearing or statutory authorities. The review petition was dismissed and the earlier decision left undisturbed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 29 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286177