Rectification power limited to apparent record errors; Tribunal could not reopen a merits-based appellate order on an unsupported mistake.

Rectification under section 43 is limited to errors apparent on the face of the record and cannot be used to reopen an appellate order on a mistaken assumption unsupported by the record. The Tribunal had already heard the appeal on merits as an appeal by the State and had affirmed the first appellate authority's order; it therefore could not later treat the matter as if it had been wrongly disposed of as an assessee's appeal. The rectification invocation was unjustified, the rectification order was set aside, and the original appellate order was restored.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in invoking section 43 to rectify its earlier appellate order on the ground that the appeal had been mistakenly treated as one filed by the assessee instead of the State.

Analysis: Rectification under section 43 is confined to errors apparent on the face of the record. The earlier appellate order showed that the Tribunal had considered the appeal on the merits as an appeal filed by the State, heard both sides, and affirmed the first appellate authority's order as just and reasonable. In that situation, the subsequent assumption that the appeal had been disposed of as if filed by the assessee was incorrect, and the case did not disclose a rectifiable error warranting alteration of the earlier order.

Conclusion: The invocation of section 43 was unjustified and the rectification order could not stand.

Final Conclusion: The assessee succeeded, the rectification order was set aside, and the original appellate order was restored.

Ratio Decidendi: Rectification power can be exercised only for an error apparent on the face of the record, and it cannot be used to reopen or alter an appellate decision where the supposed mistake is unsupported by the record.

---