Rectification requires a clear apparent error; mere disagreement with a factual finding cannot justify review.

CESTAT, New Delhi held that rectification was not available where the Revenue sought only reconsideration of an earlier factual finding that the supplier of inputs had paid appropriate duty. As no specific challenge was supported by evidence and no apparent error in the final order was shown, the alleged mistake did not qualify as a mistake apparent on record. The rectification application was therefore rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether rectification of the final order was warranted on the ground of any mistake apparent on record.

Analysis: The Tribunal found that the Revenue had merely sought reconsideration of the earlier factual finding that the supplier of inputs had paid appropriate duty. That finding had not been specifically challenged with evidence showing it to be , and no apparent error was shown in the final order.

Conclusion: No mistake apparent on record was found and the rectification application was rejected.

---