Cross-empowerment of State GST officers under the CGST Act requires a government notification; without it, their actions are invalid.

JUDGMENT

A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.

This Writ Petition has been posted before us by the Registry after getting orders from the Honourable the Chief Justice pursuant to a reference order dated 07.11.2024 of a learned Single Judge in the writ petition.

2. We have heard Smt.Ammu Charles, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.Mohammed Rafeeq, the learned Special Government Pleader for the State and Sri.S.Sreejith and Sri. J. Vishnu, the learned counsel for the Union of India. We have also gone through the pleadings in the case, the judgments cited across the bar and the reference order of the learned Single Judge.

3. The petitioner is essentially aggrieved by Exts.P2 and P4 authorisation and show cause notice, respectively, served on it in connection with proceedings initiated against under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act [hereinafter referred to as the “CGST Actâ€]. In the writ petition, the main challenge was essentially with regard to the jurisdiction of the Officers of the State GST Department to issue the aforesaid authorisation and show cause notice to the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that under Section 6 of the CGST Act, the officers appointed under the State Goods and Services Tax Act [SGST Act] or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act [UTGST Act] 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. In support of the said contention, the petitioner relies on the judgment of a Single Judge of the Madras High Court in Tvl. Vardhan Infrastructure v. Special Secretary, Head of the GST Council Secretariat [MANU/TN/2310/2024] that takes the view that Section 6(1) of the CGST Act empowers the Government to issue a notification, based on the recommendation of the GST Council, for cross-empowerment and, in the absence of such an enabling notification, the proceedings initiated by the State GST Authority are to be seen as without jurisdiction.

4. The learned Single Judge, who considered the writ petition at first instance, in his reference order dated 07.11.2024, expressed the following prima facie view in the matter:

“4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Government Pleader, I am prima facie of the view that the petitioner has not made out any case for interference with Ext.P4 show cause notice on the ground that it is issued without jurisdiction on account of the fact that there is no notification issued under the provisions of Section 6(1) of the CGST Act empowering the officers of the State Goods and Services Tax Act to issue such a show cause notice. Section 6(1) of the CGST Act reads as follows:

Section 6. Authorisation of officers of State tax or Union territory tax as proper officer in certain circumstances.

(1) Without prejudice to the provisions of this Act, the officers appointed under the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act are authorised to be the proper officers for the purposes of this Act, subject to such conditions as the Government shall, on the recommendations of the Council, by notification, specify.

(2) Subject to the conditions specified in the notification issued under sub-section (1),--

(a) where any proper officer issues an order under this Act, he shall also issue an order under the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act, as authorised by the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act, as the case may be, under intimation to the jurisdictional officer of State tax or Union territory tax;

(b) where a proper officer under the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Ter