Rectification of stay order refused where no patent error was shown and merits could not be re-argued.

A rectification request against a stay order on waiver of pre-deposit was held not maintainable under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act because the order challenged was not an appeal order under Section 35C(1). The application was also treated as an impermissible attempt to re-argue the merits and re-appraise evidence, which falls outside rectification jurisdiction. No mistake apparent from the record was shown, as the material relied on did not dislodge the prima facie doubt regarding the invoices and receipt of goods. The stay order therefore remained unmodified and the miscellaneous petition was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the miscellaneous application seeking rectification of the stay order was maintainable and whether any mistake apparent from the record existed to justify modification of the pre-deposit order.

Analysis: The application was directed against a stay order passed on the question of waiver of pre-deposit, not against an passed in appeal under Section 35C(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. On that basis, a rectification request under Section 35C(2) was held not maintainable. The application was also found to be in substance an attempt to re-argue the merits and re-appraise evidence, which is outside the scope of rectification. The alleged errors were not obvious or patent mistakes apparent from the record, and the material relied upon by the appellant did not displace the prima facie finding that the invoices and receipt of goods were in serious doubt.

Conclusion: The rectification application was not maintainable and no mistake apparent from the record was shown. The stay order was not modified and the miscellaneous petition was dismissed.

---