https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752971 Review jurisdiction under Section 114 and Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC is limited to discovery of new and important matter, mistake or error apparent on the face of the record, or analogous sufficient reason. A review cannot be used to reargue the case, reappreciate evidence, or act as an appeal in disguise. Because no patent error or new material was shown, and the challenge only sought to reopen the earlier conclusion, the review petition was held not maintainable and was rejected, leaving the earlier order undisturbed. en-us Fri, 10 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 May 2024 12:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752971 Review jurisdiction under Section 114 and Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC is limited to discovery of new and important matter, mistake or error apparent on the face of the record, or analogous sufficient reason. A review cannot be used to reargue the case, reappreciate evidence, or act as an appeal in disguise. Because no patent error or new material was shown, and the challenge only sought to reopen the earlier conclusion, the review petition was held not maintainable and was rejected, leaving the earlier order undisturbed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 10 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752971