Jurisdiction to seal godown upheld where statutory power extended to assisting tax officers; only consequential reliefs remained.

The power to seal a godown under section 14(5) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 was treated as available not only to the Commissioner but also to officers appointed under section 3(1) to assist him. On that basis, the Commercial Tax Officer was competent to act, and the sealing was not invalid for lack of delegation under rule 71. The jurisdictional challenge therefore failed. As the godown had already been unsealed and the seized documents were to be returned in the connected proceeding, only consequential reliefs remained, namely adjustment of the security deposit and consideration of applications for road permits and declaration forms according to law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Commercial Tax Officer had jurisdiction to seal the godown under section 14(5) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, and whether the challenge to the sealing and connected reliefs could succeed.

Analysis: The power under section 14(5) was held to have been conferred not only on the Commissioner but also on officers appointed under section 3(1) to assist him. In that view, the sealing was not invalid for want of delegation under rule 71, and the officer who acted was competent to exercise the statutory power. As the godown had already been unsealed and the seized documents had been directed to be returned in the connected proceeding, only consequential directions survived regarding adjustment of the security deposit and disposal of applications for road permits and declaration forms in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The challenge to the sealing on the ground of lack of jurisdiction failed, while the applicant obtained only consequential reliefs relating to the security deposit and future permits.

---