The Commissioner has the power to delegate his powers to any Value Added Tax authorities, including the Special Commissioner.

Sanjiv Khanna, J.

Teleworld Mobiles Pvt. Ltd., a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and an assessee under the Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (Act, for short), claims that they were illegally subjected to operations under Sections 59 and 60 of the Act on 27th and 28th May, 2016 at their business premises.

2. The petitioner has filed the writ petition for the following reliefs:-

“(a) declare the order of empowerment dated 23.3.2016 issued by the Commissioner to the extent it confers powers of appointment on Special Commissioner as illegal and without jurisdiction;

(b) declare the entire exercise of investigation, search and seizure conducted on 27 and 28.5.2016 u/s 59 and 60 of the Act, as illegal;

(c) direct the respondent to release and return the seized records, documents, bill books, ledgers, invoices, inventories etc., as neither any Panchnama was drawn nor any list of seized documents/records was prepared under acknowledgement of the petitioner;

(d) issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ, order or direction;

(e) pass any other order or orders, direction or directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

3. The grounds on which the aforesaid action is challenged in the present writ petition for the sake of convenience are reproduced below:-

"A. Because the exercise of investigation and enforcement covered u/s 59 and 60 of the Act fall under Chapter X of the Act. For any officer to exercise the power in any of these two Sections, was statutorily required to carry an authority in form DVAT 50. This is the mandate of Section 68(2) read with Rule 65 of the Delhi Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 (in short 'the Rules'). The officers who visited the premises on 27.5.2016 did not carry any DVAT 50 with them. They were repeatedly asked to produce the DVAT 50 issued in their name, but they did not show any such authority issued by the Commissioner. Therefore, in the absence of any authority given by the Commissioner, the operation was illegal at the nascent stage itself. Even when the request was made through a letter dated 31.5.2016 to give copy of DVAT 50, petitioner's request did not meet any response from the Deptt.

B. Because the order of empowerment dated 23.3.2016 issued by the Commissioner is not in accordance with the provisions of Section 68(2) read with Rule 65(1) of the Rules. Section 68 (2) reads as under:- "Where the Commissioner delegates his powers under Chapter X, the delegate shall carry and produce on demand evidence in the prescribed form of the delegation of these powers when exercising the powers." In terms of Section 68(1) read with sub-section (2), the Commissioner has issued an order of delegation vide No.F.6(7)/DVATIL&J/2013-14/748 dated 12.11.2013. As per the said order, powers u/s 59(1), (2), (3), (4) and Section 60(1) of the Act, could be exercised by all the officers within their respective jurisdiction not below the rank of Asstt. Value Added Tax Officer, whereas powers u/s 60(2) could not be exercised by the jurisdictional officers below the rank of Asstt. Commissioner, VAT. Through this order of delegation, the Commissioner has appointed the jurisdictional officers of the above stated ranks to exercise and discharge the functions provided under the above provisions of the Act. Nowhere from the reading of Section 68, it comes out that the Commissioner can delegate his power of appointment unto another VAT authority. This is also specifically stated in Rule 65(1) of the Rules, which reads as under:-

"Where the Commissioner wishes to appoint an officer or other person to exercise any of the powers in Chapter X of the Act, the grant of authority to exercise the powers shall be in form DVAT 50 and shall be issued by the person empowered by the Commissioner in this regard."

As per the petitioner's understanding, the power of appointment of an officer to exercise authority under Chapter X vests with the Commissioner only. That authority is t