Rectification jurisdiction cannot be used as review when a later contrary decision arises after the final order.

Rectification under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is limited to mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be used as a disguised review. A later Tribunal or court decision, not forming part of the record when the final order was passed, does not create a rectifiable error, and an earlier concession by counsel does not justify reopening the order where doing so would require reappreciation and reversal of the concluded decision. The finality of appellate orders under Section 35C(4), subject only to further remedies under Sections 35G and 35L, reinforces this limitation, so the rectification application was rejected as not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal could rectify its earlier final order on the ground that a subsequent decision of the Tribunal or a higher court had taken a contrary view, and whether the counsel's concession at the earlier hearing prevented rectification.

Analysis: The application sought to reopen a concluded final order by relying on later judicial pronouncements and on the submission that the earlier concession by counsel was mistaken. The Tribunal held that rectification under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is confined to mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be used as a disguised review. A later decision, not existing when the final order was passed, was not part of the record and therefore could not create a rectifiable mistake. The Tribunal also held that the earlier concession did not change the position, because the later plea would require reappreciation and reversal of the final order, which is beyond rectification jurisdiction. The statutory finality of appellate orders under Section 35C(4), subject only to Sections 35G and 35L, reinforced this view.

Conclusion: The application for rectification was not maintainable and was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: A subsequent contrary judicial decision, not forming part of the record when the final order was made, does not constitute a mistake apparent from the record and cannot be used to invoke rectification jurisdiction in the guise of review.

---