TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 583
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eview application has been filed to review the order passed by this Court dated 04.9.2017 made in W.P.No.10599 of 2017. 3. The said writ petition was filed by the applicant herein challenging an order passed by the first respondent dated 22.3.2017 passed in a petition under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petition under Section 264 of the said Act has been filed by the applicant aggr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Revisional Authority, not only the question of jurisdiction to entertain such a plea was considered, but also the merits and correctness of the stand taken by the assessee that there was a keying mistake, was considered. The first respondent passed the order on 22.3.2017 rejecting the revision petition. When this order was tested before this Court in the said writ petition, this Court concurr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essee and directed the Assessing Officer to accept the plea of the applicant that there was a keying error. 6. Therefore, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that nobody is infallible and that even at times, errors occur in the judgments passed by courts. In this regard, the learned counsel for the applicant has referred to an observation made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the order. From the submissions made, this Court finds that the applicant has not been able to point out any error, which is apparent on the face of the order, but the attempt appears to be re-arguing the entire matter, which is impermissible. 8. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court finds no grounds to entertain this review. Accordingly, the above review application is dismissed. After the or....