Bail Application — The counsel for the petitioner contended that though the matter was heard exhaustively on different dates, some of the issues and vital submissions made in this regard were inadvertently lost sight of while passing this judgment. The attempt of the Review Petitioners is only to have a "re-hearing" of the matter, which is not permissible in exercise of the power of review. The 'review power' can be invoked only when there is any 'error apparent on the face of record' and it is not a substitute for appeal. The remedy of the Review Petitioner, if aggrieved, is something else. The Review Petitioners virtually want to have a 're-hearing'. Such course and conduct of the Review Petitioners cannot but be deprecated. The review petitions are dismissed. — Mangal Commercial Pvt. Ltd, Shri Pankaj Agrawal, Smt. Suman Agrawal W/O Sri Pankaj Agrawal Vs. Union of India, Central Board of Indirect Taxes And Customs (Formerly Known as Central Board of Excise And Customs) , The Commissioner, Central Board of Indirect Taxes And Customs (Formerly Known As Central Board of Excise And Customs) , The Goods And Service Tax Council (GST Council) , Directorate General of Goods And Service Tax Intelligence, Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate General of Goods And Service Tax Intelligence, Superintendent (Prev.) O/O The Principal Commissioner, Central Goods, And Service Tax And Central Excise Central GST [2020] 21 TAXLOK.COM 027 (Chhattisgarh)