Rectification under Sales Tax law was not without jurisdiction; writ relief was refused because statutory appeals remained available.

A rectification notice and consequential order under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act were challenged on the ground that turnover under section 6B should not have been included in total turnover for levy under section 5. The Court held that an alleged legal mistake in assessment does not by itself mean absence of jurisdiction. The dispute was one of correctness of the assessment and could be taken before the statutory appellate forums under the Act. In view of that efficacious alternative remedy, recourse to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 was not warranted, and the rectification action was treated as not lacking jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: Whether a rectification notice and the consequential order under section 25A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act were jurisdiction or merely an erroneous application of law, and whether the writ petition was maintainable despite the statutory appellate remedy.

Analysis: The challenge was to the power of the assessing authority to reopen or rectify the concluded assessment on the ground that turnover under section 6B of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act should not have been included in the total turnover for levy under section 5 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act. The Court held that even if the assessing authority had made a legal mistake, that did not amount to absence of jurisdiction. The dispute related to the correctness of the assessment and could be pursued before the appellate forums provided under the Act. In such circumstances, recourse to article 226 of the Constitution of India was not warranted.

Conclusion: The rectification action was not without jurisdiction, and the writ petition was not maintainable in the presence of an efficacious statutory remedy.

---