https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268526 Rectification jurisdiction is confined to correcting an apparent mistake on the face of the record and cannot be used to reassess factual findings or revisit debatable legal issues. The Tribunal noted that the earlier order had already recorded detailed findings on use of capital goods in manufacturing exempted goods, distinguished the cited precedents on facts, and treated the assessee's declaration as mis-declaration. Those objections involved factual appraisal and arguable legal conclusions, not patent clerical errors. The rectification request was therefore rejected because no mistake apparent from the record was established. en-us Fri, 13 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Nov 2015 10:57:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268526 Rectification jurisdiction is confined to correcting an apparent mistake on the face of the record and cannot be used to reassess factual findings or revisit debatable legal issues. The Tribunal noted that the earlier order had already recorded detailed findings on use of capital goods in manufacturing exempted goods, distinguished the cited precedents on facts, and treated the assessee's declaration as mis-declaration. Those objections involved factual appraisal and arguable legal conclusions, not patent clerical errors. The rectification request was therefore rejected because no mistake apparent from the record was established. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 13 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268526