2026-VIL-407-MP

SGST High Court Cases

GST – Cross-empowerment of Proper Officer - Competence of the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax to pass the impugned order - Petitioners challenge the impugned order passed by Assistant Commissioner of State Tax imposing tax liability on the ground that the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax is not the Proper Officer as defined under the provisions of Section 2(91) of the CGST Act, 2017 and therefore, the impugned order suffers from jurisdictional error – HELD - The provisions for CGST and SGST are pari materia. In terms of Section 2(91) of the CGST Act, 2017, a "proper officer" in relation to any function to be performed under the Act means the Commissioner or the officer of the Central Tax who is assigned that function by the Commissioner in the Board - Further, officers of the State Tax or Union Territory Tax can be authorized as Proper Officer in certain circumstances, which are enumerated under Section 6 of the Act, which provides that the officers appointed under the SGST Act can be authorized to be the Proper Officer for the purposes of the Act, subject to such conditions as the Government shall, on the recommendation of the Council, by notification, specify. However, the respondents fairly admitted that there is no such recommendation by the Council for notifying the respondent No.4 (Assistant Commissioner of State Tax) as the Proper Officer - The impugned order passed by the respondent No.4 is quashed, being an order by an incompetent authority. The liberty is granted to the Competent Authority to pass a fresh order in accordance with the law – The writ petition is allowed

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page