Delegated authority limits invalidate seizure and consequential penalty when the authorised seizing officer was not empowered.

Under the West Bengal sales tax delegation scheme, seizure of a notified commodity had to be made by the officer authorised under the relevant delegation order. A Commercial Tax Officer acted without that delegated authority, so the seizure was without jurisdiction. Because the penalty order was based on an invalid seizure, it could not survive. The amount deposited for release of the goods was therefore refundable to the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the seizure of the consignment and the consequential penalty order were valid when the seizure was effected by a Commercial Tax Officer instead of the officer empowered under the delegation order.

Analysis: Under the delegation of powers framed under rule 4 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1954, read with the delegation order dated 24 July 1987 under the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1954, the authority competent to seize the notified commodity referred to in section 7 of the Act was the Assistant Commissioner. The seizure in the present case had been made by the Commercial Tax Officer. As the officer who acted was not the duly authorised seizing authority on the relevant date, the seizure was without jurisdiction. Once the seizure failed, the penalty imposed on the basis of that seizure could not survive, and the amount deposited for release of the goods became refundable.

Conclusion: The seizure was invalid for want of jurisdiction, the penalty order fell with it, and the deposited amount was directed to be refunded, all in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: An action taken by an officer lacking the delegated authority prescribed under the governing sales tax regime is without jurisdiction and cannot sustain a consequential penalty order.

---