https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800981 Rectification cannot be used to obtain reappreciation of evidence where no error apparent on the record exists, and factual disputes cannot be reopened in an appeal limited to substantial questions of law. Rejection of rectification and objections seeking factual reassessment therefore remains undisturbed. A three-month interval between conclusion of hearing and pronouncement, attributable to heavy pendency, does not by itself invalidate the Tribunal's order. Personal penalties are sustainable where a person deals with excisable goods known or reasonably believed to be liable to confiscation, as permitted under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Confiscation and penalty findings consequently remain effective. en-us Tue, 22 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Oct 2026 06:28:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800981 Rectification cannot be used to obtain reappreciation of evidence where no error apparent on the record exists, and factual disputes cannot be reopened in an appeal limited to substantial questions of law. Rejection of rectification and objections seeking factual reassessment therefore remains undisturbed. A three-month interval between conclusion of hearing and pronouncement, attributable to heavy pendency, does not by itself invalidate the Tribunal's order. Personal penalties are sustainable where a person deals with excisable goods known or reasonably believed to be liable to confiscation, as permitted under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Confiscation and penalty findings consequently remain effective. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 22 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800981