The assessee was represented by counsel and was given full opportunity of hearing before the judgment was pronounced. The assessee sought review on the ground that the Court had not specifically decided whether the returns were duly and validly filed. The Court held that there was no error apparent on the face of the record since the judgment had directed the returns to be processed in accordance with law and had also clarified that, if the period for processing had expired, the returns were to be accepted at face value. The limited power of review cannot be exercised to substitute another view for a view already taken after hearing the parties. Accordingly, the review petition was held to be not maintainable. (AY. 2013-14)