Rectification of record cannot reopen merits or reappreciate evidence; modification plea against a stay order was rejected.

Rectification under the Tribunal's procedural powers is confined to patent mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be used to reopen merits or reappreciate evidence. A modification application challenging a stay order on issues such as captive consumption, inclusion of expenses in assessable value, limitation, and an alleged witness admission did not disclose any clerical, numerical, or manifest error. The Tribunal held that an alleged wrong conclusion on merits is not an error apparent on the face of the record, so the application was not maintainable on the pleaded grounds and was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the modification application could be allowed on the ground that the stay order suffered from an error apparent on the face of the record and required rectification under the Tribunal's procedural powers.

Analysis: The application sought reconsideration of the stay order on factual and legal merits, including the recording of captive consumption, inclusion of expenses in assessable value, alleged omission to consider limitation, and the supposed admission by a witness. The Tribunal held that none of these grounds disclosed any glaring clerical, numerical, or patent mistake. A wrong conclusion on merits is not a mistake apparent from the record, and rectification cannot be used to reopen appreciation of evidence or reargue the case.

Conclusion: The modification application was not maintainable on the pleaded grounds and was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Rectification is confined to patent mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be invoked to obtain reconsideration on merits or reappreciation of evidence.

---