Rectification limits under mistake apparent from the record: a recall plea cannot be used as a disguised review.

Rectification or recall under mistake apparent from the record was refused where the Tribunal had already considered the assessee's contention that the earlier Excon decision was inapplicable because the relevant argument had not been raised there. The Tribunal treated the application as a disguised review, which is not permissible in rectification proceedings. It also held that failure to discuss every ground does not by itself amount to an apparent mistake, and the cited finality of classification authorities did not justify relief on this basis. No mistake apparent from the record was established, so the request for recall or rectification was not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order called for rectification or recall on the ground of an alleged mistake apparent from the record, including non-consideration of the assessee's contention that the earlier Excon decision was inapplicable and the alternate plea based on finality of the classification order.

Analysis: The Tribunal held that the appellant's contention had already been noted and dealt with in the impugned order, which had specifically considered the plea that the earlier decision on identical goods and the Supreme Court's approval did not apply because the particular argument had not been raised in that case. The Tribunal further held that the application was in substance an attempt to seek review of the earlier order, which is impermissible in rectification proceedings. On the alternate plea, the Tribunal held that omission to deal with every ground raised does not constitute a mistake apparent from the record, and the cited authorities on finality of classification did not advance the appellant's case for ROM relief.

Conclusion: No mistake apparent from the record was made out, and the request for recall or rectification was not maintainable.

---