https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433042 Review jurisdiction under Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC remains confined to discovery of new matter, an error apparent on the face of the record, or another analogous ground, and cannot be used to reargue the same controversy on merits. The review applications merely repeated the earlier challenge to the proviso to Section 140(1)(i) of the Tamil Nadu GST Act without showing any patent error, so they were dismissed as not maintainable. The writ petitions then followed the earlier batch decision on transition of tax deducted at source credit under Section 140(1), and the assessees were held entitled to the benefit of that ruling. en-us Fri, 02 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 12 Apr 2025 13:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433042 Review jurisdiction under Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC remains confined to discovery of new matter, an error apparent on the face of the record, or another analogous ground, and cannot be used to reargue the same controversy on merits. The review applications merely repeated the earlier challenge to the proviso to Section 140(1)(i) of the Tamil Nadu GST Act without showing any patent error, so they were dismissed as not maintainable. The writ petitions then followed the earlier batch decision on transition of tax deducted at source credit under Section 140(1), and the assessees were held entitled to the benefit of that ruling. Case-Laws GST Fri, 02 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433042