Rectification confined to apparent mistakes; disputed VAT Form 240 errors must be pursued through the statutory appeal route.

Rectification under Section 69(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 is limited to mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be used to resolve disputed factual issues or errors needing appellate scrutiny. An alleged error in a Chartered Accountant's certificate used for VAT Form 240 was treated as requiring factual adjudication, not as an obvious record-based mistake. Because an efficacious statutory appeal was available and the assessment order was not challenged, writ relief was declined and the petitioner was directed to pursue the appellate remedy.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging rejection of rectification and garnishee proceedings was maintainable in view of the alternative statutory remedy, and whether the alleged error in VAT Form 240 could be corrected as a mistake apparent from the record.

Analysis: The dispute turned on factual matters requiring adjudication by the appellate forum, and the assessment order itself was not challenged. Rectification under Section 69(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 is confined to mistakes apparent from the record. An error said to have been made in the Chartered Accountant's certificate while preparing VAT Form 240 was held not to be such an obvious error warranting rectification under that provision. The Court also noted that the petitioner had an efficacious statutory appeal available and that the proper course was to pursue that remedy.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not entertained on merits, and the petitioner was relegated to the statutory appellate remedy.

Ratio Decidendi: Rectification under Section 69(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 is confined to a mistake apparent from the record and cannot be used to resolve disputed factual issues or errors requiring appellate scrutiny; where an efficacious statutory appeal is available, writ relief need not be granted.

---