2026-VIL-726-GUJ
  1. Home
  2. 2026-VIL-726-GUJ

SGST High Court Cases

GST - Cross-Empowerment of Officers under IGST Act, 2017 - Authorization without Central Government Notification - Statutory interpretation of Section 4 of IGST Act, 2017 regarding authorization of State officers as proper officers - Petitioner assailed confiscation order and summary order, contending that officers appointed under SGST Act are not authorized to exercise powers under the IGST Act without a specific notification issued by the Central Government under Section 4 of the IGST Act – Petitioner contends that though the Commissioner of State Tax had issued an order specifying proper officers under the State Act, the same would not empower such officers to pass orders unless there is a notification issued under Section 4 of the IGST Act empowering such officers to exercise their powers - Whether a Central Government notification is mandatory under Section 4 of the IGST Act to authorize State officers to exercise powers under IGST Act or whether the statutory language itself confers such authorization - HELD – From reading of Section 4 of the IGST Act it manifests that the officers appointed under the SGST are authorized to be the proper officers for the purpose of the IGST Act. The language of Section 4 of the IGST Act indubitably prescribes that the officers appointed under the SGST Act are authorized and empowered to carry out their powers or functions for the purpose of the IGST Act. The section does not in any manner mandate issuance of Notification by the Central Government suggesting or stipulating any division of powers by such proper officers but it is left on the discretion of the Proper Officer appointed by the State Government to further delegate the powers to other officers, which is already done through the order dated 23.06.2017 issued by the Commissioner of State Tax - The Court find merit in precedents from the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, High Court of Calcutta and High Court of Madhya Pradesh, all of which held that no notification is required and officers appointed under State GST Act are authorized to exercise powers under IGST Act. On overall appreciation of the provisions of the Acts as well as the legal precedent set out by other High Courts, there are no merits in the submissions that Notification is required since Section 4 of the IGST Act already takes care of the state of affairs - The confiscation order and summary order are valid and the writ petition is dismissed - Appeal remedy and procedural propriety - Scope of Section 107 of CGST Act for filing appeal against orders passed by proper officers under IGST Act - Petitioner contended that since there is no provision in the CGST Act or under State GST Act governing filing of appeal against any order passed by any proper officer under the IGST Act - The petitioner further relied on Section 6(3) of SGST Act arguing that any order passed by State authority officers shall not lie before an officer appointed under the CGST Act and therefore the petitioner is left without any remedy - Whether an appeal can be filed under Section 107 of the CGST Act against orders passed by State officers exercising powers under IGST Act and if so what is the proper appellate authority - HELD - The Section 107 of the CGST Act provides for filing an appeal against an order passed under this Act or the SGST Act or the UTGST Act. Section 4 of the IGST Act creates a deeming fiction of passing an order by the proper officers under the SGST Tax Act and hence an appeal would lie before the appellate authority under Section 107 of the CGST Act if the order is passed by the proper officer exercising powers under CGST Act. However since in the present case the orders have been passed by the proper officers of the State Government, the provision of Section 107 of the State Act gets attracted. – The provision of Section 6(3) of the SGST Act cannot be made an excuse of non-filing of an appeal since the appeal would only lie to the appellate authority of the State under the provision of Section 107 of the State Act. The petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing an appeal and therefore cannot resort to writ jurisdiction - The writ petition cannot be entertained and stands dismissed.
Download File

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Tax Vista

Your Weekly Tax Recap

By Kasi Viswanathan V

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GSTAT Filing Near: Closing Resolutions...
By CA Vivek Jalan

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Security-Code
New Code?

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Security-Code
New Code?

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?