Rectification jurisdiction is limited to patent errors; a concluded merits-based appellate order cannot be reopened as a review.

Rectification under Section 62 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 is confined to correcting an obvious and patent mistake apparent from the record. The Tribunal cannot use rectification to reopen a concluded appellate order on the basis that a precedent was missed or a factual distinction was later asserted, where the alleged error would require fresh reasoning or merits review. A conscious merits-based view is not a clerical or accidental omission. Accordingly, the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to recall and reopen the earlier order on the stated grounds, and the rectification orders were unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal could invoke rectification jurisdiction to reopen its earlier appellate order on the ground that a precedent or factual distinction had been missed, when the alleged error did not amount to a mistake apparent from the record.

Analysis: The power under Section 62 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 is confined to rectifying a mistake apparent from the record. Such a mistake must be obvious and patent, and not one that requires a long-drawn process of reasoning or a fresh adjudication on the merits. A rectification application cannot be used as a substitute for appeal or review. On the facts, the earlier appellate order reflected a conscious view that the cited precedent laid down a general proposition applicable to the schemes in question; this was a merits-based conclusion, not an accidental omission or clerical error. The alleged non-consideration of another decision or the asserted factual distinction therefore did not furnish a rectifiable mistake within the statutory limits. The analogy drawn from Section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 supports rectification only where the error is manifest and attributable to an obvious oversight.

Conclusion: The Tribunal had no jurisdiction to recall and reopen the earlier appellate order under Section 62 on the stated grounds, and the rectification orders were unsustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: Rectification under Section 62 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 is limited to correcting an obvious and patent mistake apparent from the record and cannot be used to revisit a conscious merits-based determination or to conduct what is, in substance, a review.

---