The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has issued a fresh circular on 25 June 2026 for the conduct of GST proceedings when taxpayers having registration move their principal place of business and fall under a different GST jurisdiction. According to the latest circular, the clarification is meant to clear any confusion among field officers and to ensure uniformity in the approach across the country. The issue was that taxpayers frequently move from one GST jurisdiction to another when they change their principal place of business, leading to questions about the validity of actions already taken by the former jurisdiction and which officer would deal with pending cases and future legal actions. As per the CBIC, references have been received from field formations seeking clarification on the validity of action taken, and on the authority competent to act, at various stages of proceedings under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 in cases where the jurisdiction of the taxable person has changed on account of change in Principal Place of Business.
The CBIC has established clear guidelines for handling GST cases when registered taxpayers shift their principal place of business between tax jurisdictions. According to the CBIC circular, when a registered taxpayer transfers its principal place of business from one tax jurisdiction to another, the new jurisdictional authority will take over and handle all pending proceedings related to the taxpayer. This framework ensures continuity in GST case management despite business relocations, with the clarification coming after the CBIC received representations from field formations seeking guidance on jurisdictional authority responsibilities. The department had sought guidance on situations where proceedings had already commenced under one jurisdiction but the taxpayer subsequently migrated to another GST jurisdiction because of a change in the Principal Place of Business. The governing principle applicable uniformly across all stages of actions or proceedings is that jurisdiction to exercise a statutory power is required to be assessed as on the date on which the power is actually invoked, as noted in the CBIC circular.
The CBIC has clarified that any action or proceeding undertaken by the transferor jurisdictional authority remains valid even after the taxpayer shifts to another tax jurisdiction. According to the CBIC circular, where any action or proceeding under the CGST Act and the rules made thereunder has been validly undertaken by the transferor jurisdictional authority having jurisdiction over the registered taxpayer on the date such action was undertaken, the same shall remain valid notwithstanding the subsequent migration/ transfer of the taxable person to another jurisdictional authority. As reported by the CBIC, the transferee jurisdictional authority shall act upon, give effect to, and proceed on the basis of such earlier valid action taken by the transferor jurisdictional authority, as if it had itself initiated the same. This provision ensures that ongoing investigations, audits, show cause notices, adjudication proceedings continue without interruption, covering all actions including investigation, audit, show cause notice or adjudication under the Central GST law. The circular makes it clear that every action validly undertaken by the transferor jurisdictional authority including investigation, audit, issuance of show cause notices, adjudication orders, review orders, filing of appeals, appellate proceedings or any other proceedings under the CGST Act and Rules shall remain legally valid even after the taxpayer migrates to another jurisdiction. The CBIC notes that judicial treatment of post-migration/transfer actions, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and Hon'ble High Courts in various judicial pronouncements in tax related matters, shows that the past acts of a competent authority remain valid, and enforcement and further proceedings must be taken over by the officer, who has now acquired jurisdiction.
The indirect tax board outlined specific procedures for handling cases involving jurisdictional transfers. According to the CBIC circular, where proceedings initiated by the transferor authority remain pending at the time of migration, the transferee jurisdictional authority shall assume control of the matter and complete the proceedings from the stage at which it stood at the time of migration/ transfer. The circular emphasizes that all subsequent stages must be handled by the officer who presently has jurisdiction over the taxpayer. Additionally, if any fresh issue comes to the notice of the earlier jurisdictional authority after the taxpayer has shifted to a new jurisdiction, the tax officer cannot initiate fresh proceedings or take any further action against the taxpayer. Instead, it must simply communicate the issue to the officer presently exercising jurisdiction, who alone will be competent to proceed further. The transferee authority will also be responsible for all consequential actions, including implementation of earlier orders, defending or conducting proceedings before appellate authorities or the GST Appellate Tribunal, filing appeals wherever required, and taking all subsequent statutory actions arising out of the original proceedings. The CBIC clarifies that the transferee jurisdictional authority shall be the competent authority to give effect to, implement, or act upon any such action already taken, and also to act upon any consequential action arising from the antecedent proceedings, including representing, defending, or otherwise conducting proceedings, filing of appeals before the appellate authority or appellate tribunal. The CBIC has clarified that the Board has clarified three key principles: all proceedings validly initiated by the transferor jurisdictional authority before migration shall continue to remain valid, after migration, the transferor authority shall not initiate any fresh proceedings against the taxpayer, and the transferee jurisdictional authority shall be the competent authority to continue pending proceedings, implement earlier actions, conduct appellate litigation and undertake all consequential proceedings under the CGST Act.
The CBIC has granted expanded authority to the new jurisdictional officers handling transferred cases. As reported in the circular, the new jurisdictional officer will also have the authority to initiate and conclude any consequential proceedings arising from the case. This comprehensive authority ensures that all aspects of GST proceedings related to the taxpayer are properly managed by the appropriate jurisdictional authority, regardless of where the business operations are currently located. The circular notes that the transferee officer will have full authority to complete the proceedings and undertake every consequential action arising from them. The new officer will also be responsible for implementing earlier orders and appearing before appellate authorities or tribunals on behalf of the department, defending cases and filing appeals as and when required. The CBIC has clarified that the Board has clarified three key principles: all proceedings validly initiated by the transferor jurisdictional authority before migration shall continue to remain valid, after migration, the transferor authority shall not initiate any fresh proceedings against the taxpayer, and the transferee jurisdictional authority shall be the competent authority to continue pending proceedings, implement earlier actions, conduct appellate litigation and undertake all consequential proceedings under the CGST Act.
Tax experts have welcomed the CBIC's clarification as addressing long-standing procedural gaps under GST. According to Business Standard reports, AMRG Global Managing Partner Rajat Mohan said the clarification fills an important procedural gap under GST and is expected to bring greater consistency in handling cases involving the migration of taxpayers. Mohan noted that by clearly defining the responsibilities of transferor and transferee authorities, CBIC has removed ambiguity that often resulted in jurisdictional objections and delays in adjudication. The CBIC circular notes that this clarification is consistent with principles laid down by the Supreme Court and various High Courts in tax matters, emphasizing that judicial decisions have consistently recognized that actions validly taken by a competent authority remain enforceable even after a subsequent change in jurisdiction. The circular is expected to provide greater certainty in handling GST cases involving migration of taxpayers and help avoid jurisdictional disputes between tax authorities. The matter has been examined in consultation with the Union Ministry of Law and Justice, with the CBIC stating that difficulty, if any, in implementation of the above instructions may please be brought to the notice of the Board.
