Case Details: Sales Tax Officer, Barasat Charge vs. Sanjay Sur (2026) 39 Centax 409 (Cal.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Kausik Chanda, J.
- S/Shri Md. T. M. Siddiqui, Sr. Adv. Tanoy Chakraborty & Saptak Sanyal, Advs., for the Petitioner.
- S/Shri Prabhat Kr. Singh & Prashant Kr. Singh, Advs., for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioners were engaged in the business of cotton trade and were predominantly exporters, and had sought issuance of declarations in Form H before the Sales Tax Officer to avail of export-related benefits, which were rejected by the department. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners invoked revisional jurisdiction under section 86 of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (WBVAT Act) before the Joint Commissioner, who allowed issuance of the declarations and subsequently affirmed the same upon suo motu review. Thereafter, the department initiated proceedings under section 85 of the WBVAT Act before the Senior Joint Commissioner, who restricted the benefit to a limited set of transactions. The petitioners challenged such action before the High Court, where the Single Judge quashed the order passed by the Senior Joint Commissioner, and the matter arose in review proceedings questioning such determination. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that when a Joint Commissioner exercises revisional powers under section 86 of the WBVAT Act as a delegatee, such exercise is in the capacity of the Commissioner himself, and the resulting order assumes the legal character of an order passed by the Commissioner. It was observed that once such revisional jurisdiction is exercised, the order ceases to be that of a subordinate officer and cannot be subjected to further revision under section 85 of the WBVAT Act. The Court clarified that both the Joint Commissioner and Senior Joint Commissioner derive their authority from the same source. In the absence of an express statutory provision, one delegatee cannot revise or sit in appeal over the exercise of powers by another delegatee. It was further held that section 85 of the WBVAT Act does not empower revision of an order which is deemed in law to be that of the Commissioner. Therefore, the Senior Joint Commissioner lacked jurisdiction to undertake such a revision. Accordingly, the review was dismissed, and the earlier order quashing the action of the department was sustained.
List of Cases Reviewed
- Sanjay Sur v. Sales Tax Officer — WPO No. 782 of 2015, dated 10-4-2023 — Affirmed [Paras 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 34]
List of Cases Cited
- Ashwin Industries v. Deputy Commissioner — 1979 SCC OnLine Guj 93 — Relied on [Paras 32, 33]
List of Notifications Cited
- Notification No. 792-F.T., dated 31-3-2005 [Para 22]
- Notification, 16-1-2009 [Para 16]
