Whether Separate Notification For Cross-Empowerment Of State Officials Under GST Act Is Required ? These Two High Court Differs

The issue raised before the Kerala High Court and Madras High Court was whether separate notification for cross-empowerment of state officials under GST Act is required?

Tvl. Vardhan Infrastructure v. Special Secretary, Head of the GST Council Secretariat: Madras High Court

Both the Madras High Court and Kerala High Court have different opinions.

The Madras High Court in Tvl. Vardhan Infrastructure v. Special Secretary, Head of the GST Council Secretariat, which takes the view that, without there being a notification as contemplated by the provisions of Section 6(1) of the CGST Act, there is no cross-empowerment, and the Central Authority or the State Authority to which a taxpayer is assigned must be the one to initiate proceedings under CGST/SGST Acts.

Pinnacle Vehicles And Services Private Limited Versus Joint Commissioner: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court in the case of Pinnacle Vehicles And Services Private Limited Versus Joint Commissioner held that cross-empowerment of GST officers to function as proper officers under the CGST Act is through the legislative mandate under Section 6(1) of the CGST Act. The bench of Justice A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Easwaran S. has observed that while the statutory mandate at present is unqualified, it will be qualified in the event the Government specifies conditions for the exercise of power under the statutory mandate, pursuant to the recommendations of the Council. 

Section 6 Of CGST Act

Section 6 of the GST Act deals with the authorisation of officers of State tax or Union territory tax as proper officers in certain circumstances.

Under Section 6 of the CGST Act, the officers appointed under the GST cannot be authorised as proper officers for the purposes of the CGST Act unless and until conditions for exercise of the powers of a proper officer are first specified by the Government on the recommendation of the GST Council through a notification issued for the purpose.

Read More: This Patna High Court Judgement Interprets Section 107(1) Of GST Act In Favour Of Assessee

• Author
• Recent Posts

Mariya Paliwala

Mariya is theSenior Editor at JurisHour. She has 5+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies like LiveLaw & Taxscan.

Latest posts by Mariya Paliwala (see all)

• Gujarat HC Quashes Appellate Rejection of IGST Refund Over EPCG Evidence Dispute - July 11, 2025
• Lithium-Ion Batteries for Mobile Phones Attract 12% IGST, Not 28%: CESTAT - July 11, 2025
• Bombay High Court Refuses to Order Retrospective Customs Duty Correction Over Alleged Tariff Error - July 11, 2025