Rectification cannot be used as review where marketability was already considered and no apparent mistake exists.

Rectification proceedings are limited to mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be used to seek review of an earlier decision. The Tribunal held that the assessee's argument on physician's samples had already been considered, including the marketability test based on capability or suitability for sale and use. A statutory prohibition on sale under another law did not by itself show that the goods were incapable of being sold. As no apparent error was shown, the rectification application was not maintainable and was rightly rejected, leaving the earlier order undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rectification of mistake application was maintainable on the ground that the earlier order had not considered the assessee's contention that physician's samples were not marketable and that their sale was prohibited by law.

Analysis: The Tribunal found that the earlier order had in fact dealt with the contention in detail and had applied the test of marketability as capability or suitability for sale and use. A statutory prohibition on sale under another law did not by itself establish that the goods were incapable of being sold. The grievance, therefore, did not disclose any mistake apparent from the record. The remedy sought was, in substance, a review of the earlier decision, and rectification proceedings cannot be used for such review.

Conclusion: The rectification of mistake application was not maintainable and was rightly rejected.

Final Conclusion: The earlier order was left undisturbed, and no rectification was granted.

Ratio Decidendi: Rectification is confined to mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be used to re-open or review a conscious decision reached after consideration of the parties' submissions.

---