https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444894 Review under Section 128 of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 was rejected because the earlier order had already considered the extendability of the 30-day period and reached a conscious conclusion on merits. The Court held that review is not available merely because another view is possible; it requires a palpable or apparent error on the face of the record. The cited Bombay High Court decision did not justify reconsideration, as the earlier order had relied on the Supreme Court's decision in arriving at its view. No ground for review was made out, and the prior order remained undisturbed. en-us Fri, 06 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Oct 2023 10:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444894 Review under Section 128 of the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 was rejected because the earlier order had already considered the extendability of the 30-day period and reached a conscious conclusion on merits. The Court held that review is not available merely because another view is possible; it requires a palpable or apparent error on the face of the record. The cited Bombay High Court decision did not justify reconsideration, as the earlier order had relied on the Supreme Court's decision in arriving at its view. No ground for review was made out, and the prior order remained undisturbed. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 06 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444894