Scott #632c? I Know That Doesn't Exist

On a first glance I was going to mark it as Scott #632.
Then I noticed that the stamps have 1 edge imperforated, just one edge each. So I was going to call it Scott #632B.
Then I noticed that both stamps belongs to a single pair where the imperf is vertical instead of horizontal , so it's not #632B where its horizontal imperf.
The right hand stamp (on the cover) is cut off of the left stamp (on the cover) from the left side (Picture attached).



*** Moved by Staff to a more appropriate forum. ***

Your stamps are two adjacent singles from a booklet pane. They were probably an attached pair at one time - now slightly overlapped. They have natural straight edges from the perimeter of the pane. Very common, very normal. Slightly miscut.

I have natural edge stamps in my possession. This particular one, the natural edge green shading is not stretchered entire vertical length on the cut edge (in fact it stretches exactly the same as the stamp green edge), make me assume it is the portion of the adjacent stamp which is cut

Correct, your stamp from a booklet pane is slightly miscut to show the edge of the stamp in the pane to the left. Miscut booklets are very common.

Great info. Thank you