Rectification of mistake requires an obvious record error; a debatable omission on Chapter 30 Note 5 was not enough.

A rectification of mistake application will not succeed unless the record shows an obvious and patent error; a debatable issue or one requiring detailed reasoning is not a mistake apparent on the record. The Tribunal noted that the earlier final order had already considered the argument based on Note 5 to Chapter 30 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, including the surrounding facts and the reliance on prior precedent. Since the alleged omission was not established, no mistake apparent on record was made out and the rectification application was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rectification of mistake application could be allowed on the ground that the earlier final order had not recorded a finding on the applicability of Note 5 to Chapter 30 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.

Analysis: The application was founded on the assertion that the earlier order had omitted to decide the plea relating to Note 5 to Chapter 30, which deems certain processes in relation to products of Heading 30.03 as manufacture. The record showed that the Tribunal had noticed the argument in the earlier order and had also considered the surrounding facts, including the declaration of the disposable syringes and needles as packing material and the reliance placed on the earlier precedent. A mistake apparent on record must be an obvious and patent error, not one requiring prolonged argument or a process of reasoning on debatable points.

Conclusion: No mistake apparent on record was made out, and the rectification application was rejected.

---