https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237189 Rectification was unavailable where the application merely reargued the merits of a classification dispute rather than identifying any mistake apparent on the record. The alleged non-consideration of misdeclaration was not an obvious error because that issue would arise only if the goods were first found not classifiable as melting scrap. Reliance on HSN notes and Section Note 8(n) of Section XV likewise disclosed no patent mistake, as the earlier order had already considered the relevant materials, competing classifications, and consistency with prior decisions. The asserted factual inaccuracy in one paragraph was only a minor recording error and did not affect the substantive classification conclusion, so the rectification request was rejected subject to a minor editorial correction. en-us Mon, 07 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 28 Dec 2013 11:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237189 Rectification was unavailable where the application merely reargued the merits of a classification dispute rather than identifying any mistake apparent on the record. The alleged non-consideration of misdeclaration was not an obvious error because that issue would arise only if the goods were first found not classifiable as melting scrap. Reliance on HSN notes and Section Note 8(n) of Section XV likewise disclosed no patent mistake, as the earlier order had already considered the relevant materials, competing classifications, and consistency with prior decisions. The asserted factual inaccuracy in one paragraph was only a minor recording error and did not affect the substantive classification conclusion, so the rectification request was rejected subject to a minor editorial correction. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 07 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237189