Rectification limitation runs from notice, not final order, where the statute treats proceedings as continuing until disposal.

Section 25A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act was construed to permit rectification of mistakes apparent from the record when the show-cause notice is issued within five years from the original order. The court treated notice and hearing as part of a continuing rectification proceeding, so the final order passed after expiry of five years remained valid if initiated within time. The provision was distinguished from other statutes with stricter language requiring completion within the limitation period. On that construction, the rectification orders were held not to be without jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: Whether rectification orders passed after the expiry of five years from the original assessment orders were without jurisdiction when show-cause notices were issued within the prescribed period.

Analysis: Section 25A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act permits rectification of mistakes apparent from the record by amendment of the order within five years from the date of the order. The question was whether the statutory requirement is satisfied by issuance of notice within the five-year period or whether the final rectification order itself must also be made within that period. The reasoning treated the notice and hearing as part of the rectification process and relied on the principle that assessment-related proceedings remain pending from initiation until final disposal. The provision was held analogous to rule 33(1) of the Travancore-Cochin General Sales Tax Rules, 1950, and distinguishable from the language of section 34(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 and section 35(2) of the Karnataka Agricultural Income-tax Act.

Conclusion: The limitation was held to be satisfied by issuance of the notice within five years, and the rectification orders were not without jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statutory power to rectify is exercised by issuing notice within the prescribed period, the subsequent final order passed pursuant to that notice is valid if the statutory scheme treats the proceedings as continuing until final disposal.

---