https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795577 Rectification under Section 129C(2) of the Customs Act is confined to manifest, self-evident errors apparent from the record and cannot operate as a review mechanism. The notes explain that objections concerning the statutory presumption for seized unmarked crude gold, confiscation, appreciation of evidence, precedential treatment and personal penalties require reconsideration of concluded factual or legal findings and therefore fall outside rectification jurisdiction. Binding Supreme Court and jurisdictional High Court principles prevail over contrary coordinate-bench views without requiring a Larger Bench reference. Separately reasoned confiscation findings are not invalidated merely because personal penalties are set aside. en-us Tue, 21 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Jul 2026 08:36:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795577 Rectification under Section 129C(2) of the Customs Act is confined to manifest, self-evident errors apparent from the record and cannot operate as a review mechanism. The notes explain that objections concerning the statutory presumption for seized unmarked crude gold, confiscation, appreciation of evidence, precedential treatment and personal penalties require reconsideration of concluded factual or legal findings and therefore fall outside rectification jurisdiction. Binding Supreme Court and jurisdictional High Court principles prevail over contrary coordinate-bench views without requiring a Larger Bench reference. Separately reasoned confiscation findings are not invalidated merely because personal penalties are set aside. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 21 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=795577