Rectification for alleged classification error failed where duty demand was otherwise sustained on the existing findings.

Rectification was refused because no mistake apparent on record was shown in the Tribunal's earlier order. The alleged error that the goods' classification had gone beyond the show cause notice did not affect the substantive confirmation of duty, since the demand had already been sustained on the basis of the lower authorities' findings. The Tribunal treated the final classification recorded in the order as irrelevant to the result and noted that its conclusion on classifiability was consistent with the orders below. The earlier order therefore remained undisturbed, and the rectification application was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rectification application disclosed any mistake apparent on record in the Tribunal's earlier order, on the ground that the classification of the disputed goods was said to have travelled beyond the show cause notice and that the consequential demand and penalty were not properly dealt with.

Analysis: The Tribunal noted that the earlier proceedings concerned two orders, one of which had already classified the goods under heading 7001 0090 and upheld the original authority, while the other had also resulted in confirmation of duty demand and penalty. It held that the impugned order had sustained the demand computed by the lower authorities, and that the alleged excess in re-classification did not affect the substantive confirmation of duty. The classification finally recorded was treated as irrelevant to the result, and the order was found to have reached its own conclusion on classifiability consistent with the orders below. No apparent mistake requiring rectification was shown.

Conclusion: The rectification application was rejected and the earlier order was left undisturbed.

---