Rectification is limited to apparent errors on record; a reasoned factual assessment cannot be reopened under Section 35C(2).

Rectification under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act, read with Rule 41 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, is confined to clerical, typographical, arithmetical mistakes and other errors apparent on the record. A reasoned evaluative conclusion, including the Tribunal's view that an opportunity to the Department was necessary on the facts, cannot be reopened as an apparent mistake. The absence of that point in the appeal was immaterial because the impugned order was based on the record and the circumstances considered by the Tribunal, not on pleadings alone. No error apparent on the record was made out, and rectification was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order recalled in rectification suffered from an error apparent on record so as to justify interference under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Rule 41 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982.

Analysis: The scope of rectification is confined to clerical, typographical and arithmetical mistakes, and to errors apparent on record. The impugned final order was based on the Tribunal's own assessment that an opportunity to the Department was necessary for a proper decision in the facts of the case. That observation was treated as a matter of opinion on the circumstances and not as an apparent mistake. The absence of such a ground in the appeal was also found immaterial, because the finding in the order was not based on the pleadings alone but on the record and circumstances considered by the Tribunal.

Conclusion: No error apparent on the record was made out, and the application for rectification was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Rectification under Section 35C(2) is permissible only for apparent mistakes and not for revisiting a reasoned factual or evaluative conclusion.

---