Apparent error in recording the dispute led to recall of the order and rehearing of the appeal.

An apparent error in the final order was found where the controversy was recorded on a factual basis different from the show cause notice and the lower authorities' findings. The notice concerned demand under Rule 9(2), the extended period under Section 11A(1), and whether conversion and incidental charges formed part of assessable value under Section 4(1)(a). Because the order addressed a different factual premise, the mistake was treated as apparent from the record. The earlier final order was recalled and the appeal was directed to be re-heard.

---

---

Issues: Whether the earlier final order required recall on the ground of an apparent error in recording the controversy and whether the appeal should be re-heard.

Analysis: The order under rectification was found to have proceeded on a factual basis different from the show cause notice and the findings of the lower authorities. The dispute as framed in the notice related to demand under Rule 9(2) and the extended period under Section 11A(1), together with inclusion of conversion charges and incidental charges in assessable value under Section 4(1)(a). Since the final order had dealt with a different factual premise, the mistake was held to be apparent from the record.

Conclusion: The earlier final order was recalled and the appeal was directed to be re-heard.

---