Rectification of mistake cannot reopen merits where GTA service demand and limitation were already decided on distinct factual grounds.

Rectification under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act is confined to correcting an obvious, patent and self-evident mistake, and cannot be used to review the merits or re-appreciate evidence. The Tribunal found the applicant was effectively seeking reconsideration of the confirmed GTA service demand by disputing factual findings on tax discharge and reverse charge conditions, and held that no mistake apparent from the record was shown. It also held that the limitation plea relating to GTA service could not be carried over from the separate Mining Service finding because the two issues rested on different factual and legal bases. The rectification application was rejected as not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Rectification of Mistake application disclosed any mistake apparent on the face of the record so as to justify modification of the final order, particularly in relation to the Goods Transport Agency service demand and the plea on limitation.

Analysis: The power of rectification under Section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is confined to correcting an obvious, patent and self-evident mistake and cannot be used to review the earlier decision or to re-open findings on merits. The Tribunal found that the applicant was in substance seeking reconsideration of the confirmed GTA demand by inviting re-appreciation of facts and evidence, including the absence of proof that the service recipient had discharged tax or that the conditions for reverse charge were established. It also held that the limitation plea in respect of GTA service could not be automatically imported from the separate finding on Mining Service, as the two issues rested on different factual and legal foundations.

Conclusion: No mistake apparent from the record was shown, and the request for rectification was not maintainable. The application was rejected.

---