GST; cross-empowerment; proper officer; inter-state trade; detention; seizure; confiscation; valuation; APGST Act; IGST Act
 01 Apr, 2026
Listen in 00:00 mins | Read in 66:00 mins
EN
HI

Golden Traders Vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax

  Andhra Pradesh High Court WP Nos: 541, 1756, 3097, 3225, 3227, 3252,
Link copied!

Case Background

As per case facts, petitioners' goods moving in inter-state trade were intercepted and detained/seized/confiscated by State tax officers in Andhra Pradesh. These actions were taken on grounds of undervaluation, mismatch ...

Bench

Applied Acts & Sections

No Acts & Articles mentioned in this case

Hello! How can I help you? 😊
Disclaimer: We do not store your data.
Document Text Version

1

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

***

WRIT PETITION NOs: 541, 1756, 3097, 3225, 3227, 3252, 3254, 3258 and

3354 of 2026

W.P.No.541 of 2026

Between:

1. GOLDEN TRADERS, 17/691 A, MUTHOORE, CHANGARAMKULAM,

NORTH END, ANILATHMAJA HOUSING SOC IETY, MALAPPURAM,

KERALA, 679585, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SHRI.

BIJEESH P V, C/O. MOHANAN, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O.

PONNANI, MALLAPURAM, KERALA - 679585

2. M/S FM TRADING, 16/952,953, CHANGARAMKULAM NARANIPUZHA

ROAD, CHANGARAMKULAM JUNCTION, ALA NKOD,

MALAPPURAM, KERALA, 679585, REPRESENTED BY ITS

PARTNER SHRI. MOHANAN P V , AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O.

PATTERIVALAPPI, KANHIYUR, MOOKUTHALA, MALAPPURAM,

KERALA, 679574

3. SRI P ABDUL ASKAR, DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE S/O P HAMZA,

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS , R/O PANKUZHI VEEDU HOUSE,

EDAPPALAM POST, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD, KERALA -679308 DL

NO KL5219980000314 VEHICLE NUMBER KA07B4979

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

$1. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, C/O

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, GU NTAKAL

CIRCLE, ANANTHAPURAMU DIVISION, ANANTHAPURAMU,

ANDHRA PRADESH - 515801

2. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

COMMERCIAL TAXES A P SECRETARIAT, VELEGAPUDI - 522 503

...RESPONDENT(S):

2

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

Date of Judgment pronounced on : 01-03-2026

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers : Yes/No

May be allowed to see the judgments?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be marked : Yes/No

to Law Reporters/Journals:

3. Whether the Lordship wishes to see the fair copy : Yes/No

of the Judgment?

3

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

* THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RA O

*THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

+ WRIT PETITION NOs: 541, 1756, 3097, 3225, 3227, 3252, 3254, 3258 and

3354 of 2026

% Dated: 01-04-2026

Between:

1. GOLDEN TRADERS, 17/691 A, MUTHOORE, CHANGARAMKULAM,

NORTH END, ANILATHMAJA HOUSING SOCIETY, MALAPPURAM,

KERALA, 679585, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SHRI.

BIJEESH P V, C/O. MOHANAN, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O.

PONNANI, MALLAPURAM, KERALA - 679585

2. M/S FM TRADING, 16/952,953, CHANGARAMKULAM NARANIPUZHA

ROAD, CHANGARAMKULAM JUNCTION, ALANKOD,

MALAPPURAM, KERALA, 679585, REPRESENTED BY ITS

PARTNER SHRI. MOHANAN P V , AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O.

PATTERIVALAPPI, KANHIYUR, MOOKUTHALA, MALAPPURAM,

KERALA, 679574

3. SRI P ABDUL ASKAR, DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE S/O P HAMZA,

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O PANKUZHI VEEDU HOUSE,

EDAPPALAM POST, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD, KERALA -679308 DL

NO KL5219980000314 VEHICLE NUMBER KA07B4979

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

$1. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, C/O

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, GUNTAKAL

CIRCLE, ANANTHAPURAMU DIVISION, ANANTHAPURAMU,

ANDHRA PRADESH - 515801

2. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT,

4

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

COMMERCIAL TAXES A P SECRETARIAT, VELEGAPUDI - 522 503

...RESPONDENT(S):

! Counsel for the Petitioner :Sri P. Girish Kumar, Sri V.

Raghuraman, Sri M.V.J.K. Kumar, Sri

Pasupuleti Venkata Prasad, learned

counsel for the petitioner and Sri

Sameer Gupta, learned counsel

appearing on behalf of Sri Akula Vamsi

Krishna, learned counsel for the

petitioner. and

^Counsel for Respondents : Sri R. Kalyan Chakravarthy, learned

Government Pleader for Commercial

Taxes

<GIST :

>HEAD NOTE:

? Cases referred:

1

2024 (16) CENTAX 509 (MAD)

2

2020 (34) G.S.T.L. 142

3

2020 (38) GSTL 317

4

2025 (12) TMI 941

5

2024 (84) GSTL 181 (All.)

5

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

APHC010004772026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3529]

WEDNESDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

WRIT PETITION NOs: 541, 1756, 3097, 3225, 3227, 3252, 3254, 3258 and

3354 of 2026

W.P.No.541 of 2026

Between:

1. GOLDEN TRADERS, 17/691 A, MUTHOORE, CHANGARAMKULAM,

NORTH END, ANILATHMAJA HOUSING SOCIETY, MALAPPURAM,

KERALA, 679585, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER SHRI.

BIJEESH P V, C/O. MOHANAN, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O.

PONNANI, MALLAPURAM, KERALA - 679585

2. M/S FM TRADING, 16/952,953, CHANGARAMKULAM NARANIPUZHA

ROAD, CHANGARAMKULAM JUNCTION, ALANKOD,

MALAPPURAM, KERALA, 679585, REPRESENTED BY ITS

PARTNER SHRI. MOHANAN P V , AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O.

PATTERIVALAPPI, KANHIYUR, MOOKUTHALA, MALAPPURAM,

KERALA, 679574

3. SRI P ABDUL ASKAR, DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE S/O P HAMZA,

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O PANKUZHI VE EDU HOUSE,

EDAPPALAM POST, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD, KERALA -679308 DL

NO KL5219980000314 VEHICLE NUMBER KA07B4979

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

6

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

1. THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, C/O

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, GUNTAKAL

CIRCLE, ANANT HAPURAMU DIVISION, ANANTHAPURAMU,

ANDHRA PRADESH - 515801

2. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL

SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, COMMERCIAL TAXES A P

SECRETARIAT, VELEGAPUDI - 522 503

...RESPONDENT(S):

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the

circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be

pleased toPleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more

particularly a Writ of Mandamus, setting-aside the impugned order in Form

GST MOV-11 bearing Reference No. DIN3730122552633 dated 30-12-2025,

passed by Respondent No.1 under the provisions of the CGST/APGST Act,

2017, as being void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and without authority

of law, apart from being violative of Articles 14 19(1)(g) and 265 of the

Constitution of India, and consequently direct Respondent No.1 to forthwith

release the detained goods and conveyance, without insisting on any fine,

penalty or security, and to pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated

in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased

pleased to direct release of the conveyance, there being no independent

allegation or notice against the vehicle owner and pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2026

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated

in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased

Pleased to direct immediate release of the goods u nder detention,

considering that the goods are perishable agricultural produce, and continued

detention would result in irreversible loss. deterioration in quality, and

destruction of commercial value, and pass

IA NO: 3 OF 2026

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated

in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased

7

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

pleased to stay operation of the impugned order in Form GST DRC 07

bearing Ref. No. ZD371025006307R dated 13.10.2025 and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1. PASUPULETI VENKATA PRASAD

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR COMMERCIAL TAX

Date of Reserved :16.02.2026

Date of Pronouncement :01.04.2026

Date of Upload :01.04.2026

8

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

The Court made the following common order:

(per Hon‘ble Sri Justice R.Raghunandan Rao)

As all these Writ Petitions raise a similar question of law, they are

being disposed of, by way of this common order.

2. Heard Sri P. Girish Kumar, Sri V. Raghuraman, Sri M.V.J.K.

Kumar, Sri Pasupuleti Venkata Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and

Sri Sameer Gupta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Akula Vamsi

Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R. Kalyan Chakravarthy,

learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes appearing f or the

respondents.

3. In all these cases, the officers, appointed under the APGST Act,

at various check posts, in the State of Andhra Pradesh, had intercepted

consignments, moving in the course of interstate trade from a point of origin,

which is outside the State of Andhra Pradesh, to a destination, which is also

outside the State of Andhra Pradesh. After such interception, proceedings

have been initiated, initially under Section 129 of the GST Act and in some

cases, these proceedings were continued under Section 130 of the GST Act.

4. The details of point of origin of the goods, the destination of

goods, the dates on which these consignments were intercepted and

detained/seized/confiscated and the details relating to the provisions of the

GST Act which were invoked are contained in the table set out below:

9

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

S

l.

N

o.

W.P

Number

Petitioner

Name

Origin

of

Goods

Destination

of Goods

Dates of

consignme

nts

intercepted

and

detained/

ceased/

confiscated

Provision

s of GST

Act under

which the

goods

seized

Reason

for

detentio

n

1

WP 541

of 2026

GOLDEN

TRADERS

Kerala Delhi

Date of

Interception

-

18/12/2025

Date of

order of

Confiscation

30/12/2025

Section

130

Valuation

and

Quantific

ation

2

WP 1756

of 2026

M/S T.M.

ENTERPRISE

S

Karnat

aka

Maharashtra

Date of

Interception

-

17/12/2025

Date of

order of

Confiscation

02/01/2026

Section

130

Valuation

and

Quantific

ation

3

WP 3097

of 2026

AL BADAR

SPICES

Kerala Maharashtra

Date of

Interception

-

02/01/2026

Date of

order of

Confiscation

06/01/2026

Sections

129 and

130

Valuation

4

WP 3225

of 2026

M/S R.G

TRADERS

Kerala

Maharashtra

(Nagpur)

Date of

Interception

-

12/01/2026

Date of

order of

Confiscation

21/01/2026

Section

130

Valuation

10

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

5

WP 3227

of 2026

M/S. SHIVA

TRADERS

Kerala

Maharashtra

(Nagpur)

Date of

Interception

-

12/01/2026

Date of

order of

Confiscation

19/01/2026

Section

129

Valuation

6

WP 3252

of 2026

IQBAL DEEN

Karnat

aka

Delhi

Date of

Interception

-

16/11/2025

Date of

order of

Confiscation

10/12/2025

Date of

Appeal

Order -

23/01/2026

Section

130

Valuation

7

WP 3254

of 2026

B J KUMAR

Karnat

aka

Delhi

Date of

Interception

-

18/11/2025

Date of

order of

Confiscation

10/12/2025

Date of

Appeal

Order

23/01/2026

Section

130

Valuation

11

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

8

WP 3258

of 2026

MR. SURESH

KUMAR

Karnat

aka

Delhi

Date of

Interception

-

18/11/2025

Date of

order of

Confiscation

01/12/2025

Date of

Appeal

Order

23/01/2026

Section

130

Valuation

9

WP 3354

of 2026

M/S.

SREEKRISHN

A TRADERS

Karnat

aka

Delhi

Date of

Interception

-

06/11/2025

Date of

order of

Confiscation

14/12/2025

Section

130

Absence

of

invoices

and

EWAY

bills

5. In all these cases, it is an admitted fact, that the said goods were

accompanied by all the necessary documents, set out under Section 68 of the

GST Act, 2017, except in W.P.No.3258 of 2026. However, the goods were

intercepted and proceedings, under Section 129 or 130 of the GST Act, were

initiated and continued, on the ground that the goods were grossly

undervalued or on the ground that the goods do not match the description set

out in the accompanying documents, or on the ground that the quantum of

goods intercepted, was far higher than the quantum set out in the

accompanying documents.

12

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

6. The contentions raised by the petitioners, in all the aforesaid

cases are primarily twofold. Firstly, the State authorities in the State of Andhra

Pradesh, have no jurisdiction, to initiate proceedings under Section 129 or

section 130, in relation to movement of goods under the IGST Act and

secondly, the question of valuation etc., cannot be taken up under Section 129

or 130

7. The first issue that comes up before this Court is whether the

officers appointed under the APGST act, can exercise any power under

Section 129 or 130 of the APGST Act or CGST Act for intercepting, detaining

or confiscating goods, whose movement, falls under the ambit of the IGST

Act.

8. Section 129 deals with detention/seizure and release of goods

and conveyances in transit. The officer who can detain or seize goods, under

this provision is an officer designated and authorized as a ―proper officer‖.

Section 130 deals with confiscation of goods or conveyances and levy of

penalty. Section 130(2) r/w Section 130(6) and 130(7) makes it clear that the

officer who can pass an order of confiscation of goods or conveyances and

also levy of penalty is only the ―proper officer‖. The term ―proper officer‖ is

defined, in Section 2(91), of the APGST Act, in the following terms:

―Section 2. Definitions:-

(91) "proper officer" in relation to any function to be

performed under this Act, means the Chief Commissioner

or the officer of the State tax who is assigned that function

by the Chief Commissioner;‖

13

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

9. Any officer, assigned a function by the Chief Commissioner,

would be a proper officer in relation to such function. This would also mean

that a proper officer, assigned by the Chief Commissioner, under the APGST

Act, would have jurisdiction to perform the function, assigned to him, only in

terms of the APGST Act. Assignment of function, by the Chief Commissioner,

under the APGST Act, would not empower such an officer to act under either

the CGST Act or under the IGST Act. However, section 6 of the CGST Act, as

well as Section 4 of the IGST Act, provides for cross empowerment to an

officer appointed under the APGST Act, to act as a ―proper officer‖ under the

CGST Act also. These provisions are extracted below:

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 Territory Goods and

Services Tax Act has initiated any proceedings on a

subject matter, no proceedings shall be initiated by the

proper officer under this Act on the same subject matter.

14

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

(3) Any proceedings for rectification, appeal and revision, wherever

applicable, of any order passed by an officer appointed under this

Act shall not lie before an officer appointed under the State Goods

and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services

Tax Act.

Section 4. Authorisation of officers of State tax or Union

territory tax as proper officer in certain circumstances.

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 exceptions and conditions as the

Government shall, on the recommendations of the Council,

by notification, specify.

10. For a comprehensive view on this issue, it is also necessary to

extract, Section 6 of the APGST Act, which reads as follows:

Section 6. Authorization of officers of central tax as proper

officer in certain circumstances

(1) Without prejudice to the provisions of this Act, the officers

appointed under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act,

2017 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

Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 as

authorised by the said Act under intimation to the

jurisdictional officer of central tax; (Act No.12 of

2017).

(b) where a proper officer under the Central Goods

and Services Tax Act, 2017 has initiated any

proceedings on a subject matter, no proceedings

shall be initiated by the proper officer under this Act

on the same subject matter. (Act No.12 of 2017).

(3) Any proceedings for rectification, appeal and revision,

wherever applicable, of any order passed by an officer

15

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

appointed under this Act, shall not lie before an officer

appointed under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act,

2017. (Act No.12 of 2017).

11. The respondents seek to interpret this provision to mean that an

officer, appointed under the APGST Act, can function as ―proper officer‖ under

the CGST Act or IGST Act, and his functioning as ―proper officer‖ can be

subjected to such restrictions, that the Central Government, on the

recommendations of the council, by notification, may specify. The

interpretation, of the petitioners, is that, no officer, appointed under the

APGST Act, can perform the functions of a ―proper officer‖ under the CGST

Act or the IGST Act, unless a notification is issued by the Central Government,

setting out the functions that can be performed by an officer appointed under

the APGST Act and the conditions, subject to which the State Officer is to

function.

12. The learned Counsel for the petitioners sought to rely upon the

notifications, circulars and clarifications, issued by the Central Board, to

contend that even the Central Board had understood, that section 6 of the

CGST and APGST Acts, do not cross empower officers and such cross

empowerment has to be conferred by separate notifications. The learned

Government Pleader has pointed out to the subsequent clarifications issued,

by the authorities, to the effect that no further notifications are necessary, to

cross empower officers. This court cannot interpret a provision of law, on the

basis of the understanding of the executive and as such this court is not

16

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

basing it‘s interpretation, of the above provisions, on the understanding of the

GST Council.

13. A plain reading of these provisions, as interpreted by the

respondents, would be that any officer, appointed under any Act, is

empowered to function as a ―proper officer‖ under any other Act, without any

limitation on his power or jurisdiction, unless such limitations are placed by

way of notifications. Under this interpretation, an officer, appointed under the

CGST Act, or the IGST Act, cannot perform the function of a proper officer

under the CGST Act, or the IGST Act, unless he is assigned such a function

by the Commissioner in Board. However, an officer, appointed under the

APGST Act, can perform the function of ―proper officer‖, under the CGST Act

or the IGST Act, in relation to any tax payer, in the State, without any

authorization from either the Commissioner in Board, under the Central Act or

the Chief Commissioner of the State. Such an interpretation, which confers

such unfettered discretion on a State officer, under the Central Act, is clearly

not permissible. The scheme, of the GST Acts, does not support this

interpretation.

14. The GST regime introduced a new concept of taxation, in terms

of the lists contained in Schedule VII of the Constitution of India. Prior to the

introduction of the GST regime, the power to tax, barring certain duties like

stamp duty, was granted, either under the Union List or the State list,

exclusively to the States or the Union. However, the GST regime created a

17

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

system of simultaneous taxation, wherein both the Union and the States are

taxing the same transactions of supply of goods or services or both. The

introduction of this system required an amendment to the Constitution. This

amendment introduced Articles 246A and 269A, which read as follows:

246A. Special provision with respect to goods and services tax —

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in articles 246 and 254,

Parliament, and, subject to clause (2), the Legislature of every State,

have power to make laws with respect to goods and services tax

imposed by the Union or by such State.

(2) Parliament has exclusive power to make laws with respect to goods

and services tax where the supply of goods, or of services, or both takes

place in the course of inter-State trade or commerce.

Explanation.—The provisions of this article, shall, in respect of goods

and services tax referred to in clause (5) of article 279A, take effect from

the date recommended by the Goods and Services Tax Council

269A. Levy and collection of goods and services tax in course of inter-

State trade or commerce.—

(1) Goods and services tax on supplies in the course of inter-State trade

or commerce shall be levied and collected by the Government of India

and such tax shall be apportioned between the Union and the States in

the manner as may be provided by Parliament by law on the

recommendations of the Goods and Services Tax Council.

Explanation.—For the purposes of this clause, supply of goods, or of

services, or both in the course of import into the territory of India shall be

deemed to be supply of goods, or of services, or both in the course of

inter- State trade or commerce.

(2) The amount apportioned to a State under clause (1) shall not form

part of the Consolidated Fund of India.

(3) Where an amount collected as tax levied under clause (1) has been

used for payment of the tax levied by a State under article 246A, such

amount shall not form part of the Consolidated Fund of India.

(4) Where an amount collected as tax levied by a State under article

246A has been used for payment of the tax levied under clause (1),

such amount shall not form part of the Consolidated Fund of the State.

18

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

(5) Parliament may, by law, formulate the principles for determining the

place of supply, and when a supply of goods, or of services, or both

takes place in the course of inter-State trade or commerce.

15. While Article 246A (1) conferred power on the State legislature, to

legislate, on taxation of intra state supply of goods and services, Article 246A

(2) and Article 269A, conferred exclusive power, to tax interstate supply of

goods and services, including import and export supplies, on Parliament.

Thus, while both, the state legislatures and Parliament, could simultaneously

legislate on taxing supply of goods and services, Parliament alone could tax

interstate supply of goods and services. One of the reasons for conferment of

such exclusive power is Article 286, of the Constitution, which restricts the

power of State legislatures to impose taxes on the sale or purchase of goods,

in the course of import or export of goods, out of India.

16. Under this new system of simultaneous taxation, the following

Acts came to be legislated: the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017; the

respective State Goods and Services Tax Acts, 2017; and the Integrated

Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. In addition to these Acts, The Union

Territory Goods and Services Act, 2017 for Union Territories and The Goods

and Services Tax (Compensation to States) Act, 2017, to cover certain

contingencies, were brought into force.

17. Under the GST scheme, a tax payer became liable to pay tax, on

the same supply, under the APGST, CGST and IGST Acts. The Tax levied by

under the CGST and IGST, by the Central Government, was to be collected

19

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

by the officers, appointed under the Central Tax Act. Similarly, the Tax levied

by the State Government was to be collected by the officers, appointed under

the State Tax Act. However, there was a problem in this architecture. There

was a danger of conflicting orders being passed by a Central officer and the

State officer, in relation to the same supplies. Apart from this, the compliance

burden on the tax payers would be doubled as the tax payer would have to

maintain two sets of documents, accounts etc, and file returns, in relation to

the same supplies. In order to relieve this complication, a scheme of cross

empowerment was introduced. Under this method, a tax payer would be,

allotted, administratively, to either the Centre or the State and the officers,

appointed under the appropriate Act, would function as the ―proper officer‖ for

that tax payer. However, such an officer, appointed under the Central Act

would be empowered, only in relation to the proceedings, in the Central Act,

and would not be able to take up any proceedings under the State Act and

vice versa. This difficulty was cleared, by a system of cross empowerment,

by empowering such an officer to function as the proper officer under both

Acts. This principle would apply to the IGST Act also.

18. At the stage of operationalizing these Acts, the GST council laid

down some guidelines, as to the allocation of the tax payers, to the Central or

State authorities, in the 9

th

and 21

st

meetings held on 16.01.2017 and

09.09.2017. These guidelines were circulated as circular No.01/2017, stating

thus:

20

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

Circular No.01/2017

F.No.166/Cross Empowerment/GSTC/2017

Office of the Goods & Services Tax Council

5th Floor. Tower-II, Jeevan Bharti Building.

Connaught Place, New Delhi

Dated: 20 September, 2017

To,

All Chief Secretaries of the States/UTs with Legislature/Chairperson, CBEC;

All Finance Secretaries/CCTs of the States/UTs with Legislature; All Principal Chief

Commissioners/ Chief Commissioners/Principal Commissioners/Commissioners of

Central Tax (through Member, GST, CBEC).

Sir/Madam,

Subject: Guidelines for division of taxpayer base between the Centre and States

to ensure Single Interface under GST-regarding

Based on the decisions taken in the 9th Meeting of the GST Council held on 16

January, 2017 and 21 Meeting of the GST Council held on 9 September, 2017, the

following criteria should be followed for the division of taxpayer base between the Centre

and the States to ensure single interface:

i. Of the total number of taxpayers below Rs. 1.5 crore turnover, all administrative

control over 90% of the taxpayers shall vest with the State tax administration and 10%

with the Central tax administration;

ii. In respect of the total number of taxpayers above Rs. 1.5 crore turnover, all

administrative control shall be divided equally in the ratio of 50% each for the Central

and the State tax administration;

iii. The division of taxpayers in each State shall be done by computer at the State

level based on stratified random sampling and could also take into account the

geographical location and type of the taxpayers, as may be mutually agreed;

21

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

2. Further, the broad guidelines for the purposes of computation of "Turnover" as

approved by the GST Implementation Committee in its meeting held on 31 August and 1

September 2017 and subsequently by the GST Council in its 21st Meeting held on 9

September 2017 are as follows:

i. For taxpayers registered only under VAT, the total annual State turnover under

VAT (including inter-State sales, exports and exempt goods) shall be taken as the basis

for division;

ii. For taxpayers registered under both VAT and Central Excise, the annual State

turnover under VAT shall be taken as the basis for division as State-level Central Excise

turnover is already included in it;

iii. For taxpayers registered only under Central Excise (and not under VAT), the

total annual turnover declared in Central Excise returns shall be taken as the basis for

division;

iv. For taxpayers registered only under Service Tax in a State on a stand-alone

basis, the annual turnover of the Services declared in the Service Tax returns shall be

taken as the basis for division;

v. For taxpayers registered only under Service Tax having centralized

registration, the annual all-India turnover of the Services declared in the Service Tax

returns shall be taken as the basis for division.

vi. For taxpayers registered under both VAT and Service Tax, the total non-

overlapping turnover (total of VAT and Service Tax, excluding any turnover which is

included in both) shall be calculated and used as the basis for division. The Service Tax

turnover shall be on the basis of clauses (iv) and (v) as the case may be.

3. The State Level Committees comprising Chief Commissioner/Commissioner

Commercial Taxes of respective States and jurisdictional Central Tax Chief

Commissioners/Commissioners are already in place for effective coordination between

the Centre and the States. The said Committees may now take necessary steps for

division of taxpayers in each State keeping in view the principles stated above.

22

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

Supplementary decisions, if any, may be taken by the said Committees to implement the

decision of the GST Council, keeping in view the broad principles stated hereinabove.

4. Suitable notifications regarding cross-empowerment of State and Central Tax

officers under CGST/IGST and SGST Acts respectively are being issued separately.

Yours faithfully.

Shashank Binya

(Shashank Priya) 20/9/20

Joint Secretary, GST Council

19. All the tax payers, registered under all the above Acts have been

allotted, to either the Centre or the State. Viewed from this angle, the question

of whether a taxpayer was allocated to the Centre or to the State would

become relevant. Where a taxpayer has been allotted to a State, let us say,

Andhra Pradesh, Section 6 of the CGST Act, would cross empower the State

officer, assigned the function of a ―proper officer‖ under the APGST Act, in

relation to a tax payer, would act as the ―proper officer‖ under the CGST Act

also, in relation to that tax payer. Similarly, a state officer, appointed under the

APGST Act, in Andhra Pradesh, would be empowered to act as a proper

officer, under the IGST Act, for that tax payer.

20. It would also be necessary to place a note of caution. This

interpretation of Section 6 (1) of the GST Acts, would not mean that the State

authorities lose jurisdiction, in relation to the APGST Act, when the tax payer

is allotted to the administrative jurisdiction of the Centre. In fact, Section 6 (2)

and 6 (3) which read as follows, clarify the situation:

23

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

Section 6. Authorisation of officers of State tax or Union territory

tax as proper officer in certain circumstances.

(1) …….

(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 Territory Goods and

Services Tax Act has initiated any proceedings on a

subject matter, no proceedings shall be initiated by the

proper officer under this Act on the same subject matter.

(3) Any proceedings for rectification, appeal and revision, wherever

applicable, of any order passed by an officer appointed under this

Act shall not lie before an officer appointed under the State Goods

and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services

Tax Act.

21. The Hon‘ble Supreme Court, while considering the ambit of

Section 6 (2), in Armour Security (India) Ltd. v. Commr. (CGST), (2025)

145 GSTR 385 : 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1700 had held as follows:

92. Clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 6 of the CGST Act

stipulates that where any proper officer issues an order under the

CGST Act, he must issue an order under the SGST Act or the

UTGST Act in order to intimate the jurisdictional officer of the State

tax or Union territory tax. The provision reads thus:

―6(2) Subject to the conditions specified in the notification issued

under sub-section (1),—

24

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

(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;‖

93. In construing section 6(2)(a), it is imperative to have due regard

to the legislative intent permeating the GST enactments. Section 6, in

particular, advances the objective of establishing a unified national

market for goods and services and to prevent taxpayers from the

undue hardship of being subjected to the rigours of multiple

jurisdictions.

94. The provision serves a twofold purpose : first, to insulate

taxpayers from the prospect of being proceeded against by more

than one authority for the same subject-matter; and secondly, to vest

in the officers functioning under the CGST Act, the SGST Act, or the

UTGST Act, to render a comprehensive order, thereby avoiding

multiplicity of proceedings. Such a construction is also in consonance

with the well-recognized principle of comity between jurisdictions,

which mandates that coordinate authorities must act with mutual

respect and due regard for each other's domain, so as to preclude

the possibility of conflicting determinations on the same issue.

95. To give effect to the above intent, section 6(2)(a) is couched in

terms that are both enabling and mandatory. It confers upon, and

simultaneously obliges, the proper officer to issue a corresponding

order under the SGST Act or the UTGST Act in cases where an order

is being issued under the CGST Act. The expression ―order‖,

qualified by the terms ―under this Act‖, occurring in the said provision

admits of a broad construction, so as to include every form of order

which a proper officer is competent to issue by virtue of the authority

vested in them under the statute. Such an interpretation is necessary

to ensure that the statutory mandate achieves its intended purpose of

avoiding multiplicity of proceedings and securing uniformity of

adjudication across the parallel enactments.

25

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

96. Inasmuch as the CGST Act vests the proper officer with authority

to issue ―orders‖ under various provisions, it becomes imperative that

such officer duly apprises the jurisdictional counterpart of any action

initiated by the Department in relation to a taxable person who may

otherwise fall within the administrative domain of that officer. Given

that the statutory framework envisages a regime of cross -

empowerment amongst officers, the obligation so cast operates as a

safeguard against the prejudice which may arise from the initiation of

parallel or overlapping proceedings against the same taxpayer by

different wings of the Department.

22. The Hon‘ble High Court at Madras, in TVL Vardhan

Infrastructure vs. Special Secretary

1

had considered the issue of cross

empowerment and had held that:

61. Thus, Section 6(1) of the respective GST Enactments

empowers Government to issue notification on the

recommendation of GST Council for cross-empowerment.

However, no notification has been issued except under

Section 6(1) of the respective GST Enactments for the

purpose of refund although officers from the Central GST and

State GST are proper officers under the respective GST

Enactments.

62. Since, no notifications have been issued for cross-

empowerment with advise of GST Council, except for the

purpose of refund of tax under Chapter-XI of the respective

GST Enactments r/w Chapter X of the respective GST Rules,

impugned proceedings are to be held without jurisdiction.

Consequently, the impugned proceedings are liable to be

interfered in these writ petitions.

1

2024 (16) CENTAX 509 (MAD)

26

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

63. Thus, if an assessee has been assigned administratively

with the Central Authorities, pursuant to the decision taken by

the GST Council as notified by Circular No. 01/2017 bearing

Reference F. No. 166/Cross Empowerment/GSTC/2017 dated

20.09.2017, the State Authorities have no jurisdiction to

interfere with the assessment proceedings in absence of a

corresponding Notification under Section 6 of the respective

GST Enactments.

64. Similarly, if an assessee has been assigned to the State

Authorities, pursuant to the decision taken by the GST Council

as notified by Circular No. 01/2017 bearing Reference F. No.

166/Cross Empowerment/GSTC/2017 dated 20.09.2017, the

officers of the Central GST cannot interfere although they may

have such intelligence regarding the alleged violation of the

Acts and Rules by an assessee.

65. The manner in which the provisions have been designed

are to ensure that there is no cross interference by the

counterparts. Only exception provided is under Section 6 of

the respective GST enactment. Therefore, in absence of a

notification for cross-empowerment, the action taken by the

respondents are without jurisdiction. Officers under the State

or Central Tax Administration as the case may be cannot

usurp the power of investigation or adjudication of an

assessee who is not assigned to them.

66. Therefore, the proceedings initiated by the respondents so

far against the respective petitioners by the Authorities other

than the Authority to whom they have been assigned to are to

be held as without jurisdiction. Therefore, the impugned

proceedings warrant interference.

27

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

23. With due respect to the Hon‘ble High Court at Madras, we

would hold that:

An officer, appointed under the APGST Act, is not automatically

cross empowered to exercise any function, under the CGST Act

or the IGST Act, unless the tax payer against whom any action is

proposed had been administratively allotted to the State of

Andhra Pradesh and the said officer has been appointed as the

proper officer, in relation to such a tax payer. The same principle

would apply vice versa to officers appointed under the CGST or

IGST Acts.

24. Since, the main issue, in the present case, is the jurisdiction of

officers, to exercise power under section 129 and 130, it would be necessary,

to consider, whether the above principles would govern, Section 129 and 130

also. Section 129 and Section 130 read as follows:

129. Detention, Seizure and release of goods and conveyances in

transit-

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, where any

person transports any goods or stores any goods while they are in

transit in contravention of the provisions of this Act or the rules

made thereunder, all such goods and conveyance used as a means

of transport for carrying the said goods and documents relating to

such goods and conveyances shall be liable to detention or seizure

and after detention or seizure, shall be released:-

(a) on payment of the applicable tax and penalty equal to one

hundred per cent of the tax payable on such goods and, in case of

28

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

exempted goods, on payment of an amount equal to two per cent of

the value of goods or twenty five thousand rupees, whichever is

less, where the owner of the goods comes forward for payment of

such tax and penalty;

(b) on payment of the applicable tax and penalty equal to the

fifty per cent of the value of the goods reduced by the tax amount

paid thereon and, in case of exempted goods, on payment of an

amount equal to five per cent of the value of goods or twenty five

thousand rupees, whichever is less, where the owner of the goods

does not come forward for payment of such tax and penalty;

(c) upon furnishing a security equivalent to the amount payable

under clause (a) or clause (b) in such form and manner as may be

prescribed:

Provided that no such goods or conveyance shall be detained or

seized without serving an order of detention or seizure on the

person transporting the goods.

(2) The provisions of sub-section (6) of section 67 shall, mutatis

mutandis, apply for detention and seizure of goods and

conveyances.

(3) The proper officer detaining or seizing goods or conveyances

shall issue a notice specifying the tax and penalty payable and

thereafter, pass an order for payment of tax and penalty under

clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c).

(4) No tax, interest or penalty shall be determined under sub-

section (3), without giving the person concerned an opportunity of

being heard.

(5) On payment of amount referred in sub -section (1), all

proceedings in respect of the notice specified in sub- section (3),

shall be deemed to be concluded.

(6) Where the person transporting any goods or the owner of the

goods fails to pay the amount of tax and penalty as provided in sub-

29

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

section (1) within fourteen days of such detention or seizure, further

proceedings shall be initiated in accordance with the provisions of

section 130:

Provided that where the detained or seized goods are perishable or

hazardous in nature or are likely to depreciate in value with passage

of time, the said period of seven days may be reduced by the proper

officer.

Section 130. Confiscation of goods or conveyances and levy

of penalty.

(1) Where any person---

(i) supplies or receives any goods in contravention of any of the

provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder with intent to

evade payment of tax; or

(ii) does not account for any goods on which he is liable to pay tax

under this Act; or

(iii) supplies any goods liable to tax under this Act without having

applied for registration; or

(iv) contravenes any of the provisions of this Act or the rules made

thereunder with intent to evade payment of tax; or

(v) uses any conveyance as a means of transport for carriage of

goods in contravention of the provisions of this Act or the rules

made thereunder unless the owner of the conveyance proves that it

was so used without the knowledge or connivance of the owner

himself, his agent, if any, and the person in charge of the

conveyance, then, all such goods or conveyances shall be liable to

confiscation and the person shall be liable to penalty under section

122.

(2) Whenever confiscation of any goods or conveyance is

authorised by this Act, the officer adjudging it shall give to the owner

of the goods an option to pay in lieu of confiscation, such fine as the

said officer thinks fit:

30

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

Provided that such fine leviable shall not exceed the market value of

the goods confiscated, less the tax chargeable thereon:

Provided further that the aggregate of such fine and penalty leviable

shall not be less than the penalty equal to hundred per cent of the

tax payable on such goods:

Provided also that where any such conveyance is used for the

carriage of the goods or passengers for hire, the owner of the

conveyance shall be given an option to pay in lieu of the

confiscation of the conveyance a fine equal to the tax payable on

the goods being transported thereon.

(4) No order for confiscation of goods or conveyance or for

imposition of penalty shall be issued without giving the person an

opportunity of being heard.

(5) Where any goods or conveyance are confiscated under this Act,

the title of such goods or conveyance shall thereupon vest in the

Government.

(6) The proper officer adjudging confiscation shall take and hold

possession of the things confiscated and every officer of Police, on

the requisition of such proper officer, shall assist him in taking and

holding such possession.

(7) The proper officer may, after satisfying himself that the

confiscated goods or conveyance are not required in any other

proceedings under this Act and after giving reasonable time not

exceeding three months to pay fine in lieu of confiscation, dispose

of such goods or conveyance and deposit the sale proceeds thereof

with the Government.

25. Under Section 129, or Section 130, it is the ―proper officer, who

has to detain, seize or release the goods and conveyances in transit or

confiscate the same. Here a proper officer would be the officer to whom the

31

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

Commissioner, under the APGST Act, had assigned such function. By the

very nature of the ambit of section 129 and section 130, ―the proper officer‖

would be an officer who has been assigned a general function to check goods

under transit. Such an officer would not be confined to certain tax payers only

and would have jurisdiction to check all or any vehicle or conveyance,

transiting the area assigned to him. Further, an officer assigned functions

under Section 129 would also be assigned functions under Section 130 also,

as these provisions are complementary and are intertwined.

26. In such a situation, the cross empowerment, under Section 6 of

the CGST Act and Section 4 of the IGST Act, would be sufficient to hold that a

State officer, appointed as a ―proper officer‖ under the APGST Act, can

discharge all the functions of a ―proper officer‖ under Section 129 and 130, for

the purposes of the CGST Act. We are of the opinion that different factors

operate, in the case of the IGST Act.

27. The IGST Act was enacted to collect GST on inter-state supply

of goods and services. The taxes paid under this Act, are to be shared,

according to Section 17 of the IGST Act, in the following manner:

17. Apportionment of tax and settlement of funds.––

(1) Out of the integrated tax paid to the Central

Government,––

(a) in respect of inter-State supply of goods or

services or both to an unregistered person or to a registered

person paying tax under section 10 of the Central Goods and

Services Tax Act;

32

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

(b) in respect of inter-State supply of goods or

services or both where the registered person is not eligible for

input tax credit;

(c) in respect of inter-State supply of goods or

services or both made in a financial year to a registered

person, where he does not avail of the input tax credit within

the specified period and thus remains in the integrated tax

account after expiry of the due date for furnishing of annual

return for such year in which the supply was made;

(d) in respect of import of goods or services or both by

an unregistered person or by a registered person paying tax

under section 10 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act;

(e) in respect of import of goods or services or both

where the registered person is not eligible for input tax credit;

(f) in respect of import of goods or services or both

made in a financial year by a registered person, where he

does not avail of the said credit within the specified period and

thus remains in the integrated tax account after expiry of the

due date for furnishing of annual return for such year in which

the supply was received, the amount of tax calculated at the

rate equivalent to the central tax on similar intra-State supply

shall be apportioned to the Central Government.

(2) The balance amount of integrated tax remaining in the integrated

tax account in respect of the supply for which an apportionment to

the Central Government has been done under sub-section (1) shall

be apportioned to the,––

(a) State where such supply takes place; and

(b) Central Government where such supply takes place in a

Union territory: Provided that where the place of such supply

made by any taxable p erson cannot be determined

separately, the said balance amount shall be apportioned to,–

(a) each of the States; and

33

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

(b) Central Government in relation to Union territories, in

proportion to the total supplies made by such taxable person

to each of such States or Union territories, as the case may

be, in a financial year:

Provided further that where the taxable person making such

supplies is not identifiable, the said balance amount shall be

apportioned to all States and the Central Government in

proportion to the amount collected as State tax or, as the

case may be, Union territory tax, by the respective State or, as

the case may be, by the Central Government during the

immediately preceding financial year.

[(2A) The amount not apportioned under sub-section (1) and

sub-section (2) may, for the time being, on the

recommendations of the Council, be apportioned at the rate of

fifty per cent. to the Central Government and fifty per cent. to

the State Governments or the Union territories, as the case

may be, on ad hoc basis and shall be adjusted against the

amount apportioned under the said sub-sections.]

(3) The provisions of sub-sections (1) and (2) relating to

apportionment of integrated tax shall, mutatis mutandis, apply

to the apportionment of interest, penalty and compounding

amount realised in connection with the tax so apportioned.

(4) Where an amount has been apportioned to the Central

Government or a State Government under sub-section (1) or

sub-section (2) or sub-section (3), the amount collected as

integrated tax shall stand reduced by an amount equal to the

amount so apportioned and the Central Government shall

transfer to the central tax account or Union territory tax

account, an amount equal to the respective amounts

apportioned to the Central Government and shall transfer to

the State tax account of the respective States an amount

34

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

equal to the amount apportioned to that State, in such manner

and within such time as may be prescribed.

(5) Any integrated tax apportioned to a State or, as the case

may be, to the Central Government on account of a Union

territory, if subsequently found to be refundable to any person

and refunded to such person, shall be reduced from the

amount to be apportioned under this section, to such State, or

Central Government on account of such Union territory, in

such manner and within such time as may be prescribed.

28. The purpose of Section 129 and 130, is to ensure compliance of

the provisions of the GST Acts and for checking evasion of tax. In the normal

course, evasion of tax, on intra state sales, would result in non payment of

taxes, which are rightfully due to that State and the Union. Thus, the State or

Central authority, assigned the functions of a ―proper officer‖, would be

recovering the penalty and other sums demanded, under these provisions, as

the rightful dues of that State and the Union. In the case of IGST, no part of

the taxes are due, to any intermediary state, through which the goods are

passing. In such a situation, can the intermediary state, under Section 129 or

130, levy and collect penalties or fines?

29. An illustration is necessary, to understand this situation. There is

an inter-state supply of goods, commencing from State A to State C. These

goods have to move through State B, to reach State C from State A. The

State officer, of State B, exercising powers under Section 129 or 130, seizes

35

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

and subsequently confiscates the goods moving through State B and auctions

the same or the owner of the goods pays a penalty or fine and gets his goods

released. In such a case, State B is collecting penalties and fines or

appropriating the sale price of the goods, in relation to transactions which are

not taxable in State B. It may also be noted that there is no provision, under

the GST Acts, for reimbursing the State share of penalty and/or fine, falling to

State A or State C, collected by State B. Thus, amounts rightfully due to State

A or State C are being appropriated, by State B. It is our view that Section 129

or 130 cannot be pressed to vindicate such appropriation.

30. Even if it is held that the State officer of State B, is cross

empowered to undertake such a function, various high courts have gone into

the question of whether, such an officer is empowered to go into questions of

value etc., and held to the contrary. The Hon‘ble High Court of Kerala in Alfa

Group Vs. The Assistant State Tax Officer, State Goods and Service Tax

Department & Ors.

2

, the Hon‘ble High Court of Chhattisgarh in K.P.

Sugandh Ltd. & Others Vs. State of Chhatisgarh & Ors,

3

the Hon‘ble High

Court of Gujarat in Panchi Traders Vs. State of Gujarat

4

and the Hon‘ble

High Court of Allahabad in shambhu Saran Agarwal & Company Vs.

Additional Commissioner Grade.,

5

had held that such power is not

available to an officer under Section 129 or 130 of the GST Acts.

2

2020 (34) G.S.T.L. 142

3

2020 (38) GSTL 317

4

2025 (12) TMI 941

5

2024 (84) GSTL 181 (All.)

36

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

31. The Hon‘ble High Court of Chhatisgarh, in K.P. Sugandh Ltd. &

Others Vs. State of Chhatisgarh & Ors, approving the judgment of the

Hon‘ble High Court of Kerala in Alfa Group Vs. The Assistant State Tax

Officer, State Goods and Service Tax Department & Ors., had held as

follows:

10. Merely because the manufacturer sells his products to its

customer or dealer at a price lower than the MRP, as such

cannot be a ground on which the product or the vehicle could

be seized or detained. If at all if this, according to the

respondents, is contrary to the law, the authorities are

supposed to draw an appropriate proceeding under the law. If at

all what the State counsel has submitted is to be accepted,

even then it would be only a case of an alleged sale of a

product at a lower costs than the MRP. The Inspecting

Authorities for the alleged discrepancy could have only

intimated the Assessing Authority for initiating appropriate

proceedings. What is more relevant to take note of is the fact

that the details in the invoice bill as well as in the e-way bill

matched the products found in the vehicle at the time of

inspection except for the price of sale.

11. The High Court of Kerala in the case of "Alfa Group v.

Assistant State Tax Officer" (2020) 113 taxmann.com 222

(Kerala) in an identical set of facts has held as under:

"On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the

case as also the submissions made across the Bar, I find that

none of the reasons stated in Ext. P2 order justify detention of

the goods. There is no provision under the GST Act which

mandates that the goods shall not be sold at prices below the

MRP declared thereon. Further, there is nothing in Ext. P2 order

37

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

that shows that, on account of the alleged wrong classification

of the goods there was any difference in the rate of tax that was

adopted by the assessee. In my view when the statutory

scheme of the GST Act is such as to facilitate a free movement

of goods, after self assessment by the assessees concerned,

the respondents cannot resort to an arbitrary and statutorily

unwarranted detention of goods in the course of transportation.

Such action on the part of department officers can erode public

confidence in the system of tax administration in our country

and, as a consequence, the country's economy itself. Under

such circumstances, I quash Ext. P2 detention order and direct

the respondents to forthwith release the goods belonging to the

petitioner on the petitioner producing a copy of this judgment

before the said authority. I also direct the Commissioner, Kerala

State Taxes Department, Thiruvananthapuram to issue suitable

instructions to the field formations so that such unwarranted

detentions are not resorted to in future. The Registry shall

communicate a copy of this judgment to the Commissioner,

Kerala State Taxes Department, Thiruvananthapuram for

necessary action."

14. Given the said facts and circumstances of the case, this

Court is of the opinion that under valuation of a good in the

invoice cannot be a ground for detention of the goods and

vehicle for a proceeding to be drawn under Section 129 of the

Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 read with Rule 138 of

the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017. In view of the

aforesaid the impugned order Annexure P/1 i.e. the order

passed under Section 129 and the order of demand of tax and

penalty both being unsustainable deserves to be and is

accordingly set-aside/quashed. The respondents are forthwith

directed to release the goods belonging to the petitioners based

on the invoice bill as well as the e-way bill.

38

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

32. The Hon‘ble High Court of Gujarat in Panchi Traders Vs. State of

Gujarat , had held as follows:

63. Thus, in case, there are first degree minor aberrations in

the documents such as the difference in value shown in the

eway bill and the delivery challan, minor error in vehicle

number, etc, as referred in the Circular dated 14th September,

2018, the proper officer cannot seize the goods and

conveyance. If the violation is of second degree, inviting

contravention of the provision of Act or Rule, where the

element of intention of evasion to pay the tax is not involved,

the person/dealer shall be allowed to resort to

remedy of paying penalty as specified under Se ction

129 of the CGST Act, and on payment of amount referred in

sub-section(1), all proceedings in respect of the notice

specified in sub-section(3) stands concluded. In case, the

amount is not paid, such goods are liable to be sold or

disposed as per provisions of subsection (6). In view of the

foregoing clarification, only in case of blatant violation or

contravention of provisions of the Act or Rules, which has

direct nexus with the intention to evade payment of tax, the

confiscation of goods and conveyance, during transit can be

resorted.

64. In order to invoke the severe

action of confiscation of goods and conveyance, during transit,

the contravention/infringement has to be of the highest

degree, such as absence of documents or fake or forged

documents, absence of details of dealer, forged e-way bills, a

complete deceptive/divergence/mismatch of goods, fake

registration, etc. which apparently establishes the ‗intention to

evade payment of tax‘. We may also clarify that the proper

39

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

officer cannot venture into the assessment and

valuation of goods at the time of interception of vehicle, and

resort to seizure and confiscation of goods and conveyance by

resorting to the entries in portal, and digging out the

evasion of tax, etc of third parties.

33. We are in respectful agreement with the above views, that

questions of seizure or confiscation, would not arise before a proper officer,

under Section 129 or 130, even in the normal course, on grounds of variation

in valuation etc., Such powers can be exercised, only if the conditions, set out

in the judgment of the Hon‘ble High Court of Gujarat, are satisfied.

34. In W.P. No. 3258 of 2026, the respondents had contended that,

the petitioner therein was transporting goods, without way bills. We had gone

into this issue, in our interlocutory order, dated 16.02.2026, and had observed

as follows:

8. For all the aforesaid reasons, this Court is of the view that the

goods, which have been seized or confiscated under various

impugned orders, would require to be released.

9. As far as W.P.No.3258 of 2026, is concerned, the contention

of the respondents is that, the vehicle in question was inspected

by the Officials and subsequently, by the proper Officer, who had

a complaint from the said Officials, that the driver of the vehicle

was not willing to reveal any details. The respondents also

contended that, on account of the refusal of the driver to give any

details, online verification was done, and it was found that, there

were no E-Way Bills issued for the consignment in question.

40

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

10. The contention is that the petitioner, having realized that his

consignment was under inspection, had got an E-Way Bill

prepared, after the first inspection has been completed and

forwarded it to the driver of the vehicle.

11. In such circumstances, this Court cannot accept the fact that

there was inspection much prior to the actual inspection, which

was recorded in Form – A.

12. Rule 138C of the C.G. & S.T. Rules, 2017, requires a

summary report of every inspection of the goods in transit to be

recorded online by the proper officer in Part A within 24 hours of

inspection and a final report in Part B to be recorded within three

(03) days of such inspection.

13. In the present case, there were two inspections, according to

the respondents.

14. The first inspection has not been recorded and no report has

been placed online. A report has been prepared for the second

inspection and placed online. In this report, there is no mention

about inspection of the vehicle earlier.

35. We have not been shown anything to modify the aforesaid

observations. In the circumstances, this contention of the respondents would

have to be rejected.

36. We are also alive to the fact that, the proper officer, under the

APGST Act, at the time of intercepting the conveyance or vehicle, would not

be aware whether the consignment, is under the IGST Act or any of the other

GST Acts, until the vehicle is stopped and the documents are verified. In a

case where it is found that the consignment relates to an interstate supply, the

41

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

state officer would have to permit the vehicle to continue it‘s journey.

However, if any discrepancies are found, it would be open to the state officer

to forward the said discrepancies to the proper officer of the consignee as well

as the consignor. If it is found that, the consignment is not accompanied by

necessary way bills, it would be open to the state officer, to presume that the

consignment is an intra state supply, unless that presumption is rebutted,

37. Accordingly, it would be appropriate to hold as follows:

A. An officer, appointed under the APGST Act, would be cross

empowered, to exercise jurisdiction under the CGST or IGST Act, in relation to

a tax payer, when such tax payer has been administratively allotted to the

State and the State officer is the ―proper officer‖, assigned to discharge the

said function, by the Chief Commissioner and vice versa for Central officers.

B. A ―proper officer‘ appointed under the APGST Act, and assigned

the functions, under section 129 and/or 130, of the APGST Act, can discharge

such functions, under the CGST Act also, in relation to intra state sales.

C. A ―proper officer‘ appointed under the APGST Act, and assigned

the functions, under section 129 and/or 130, of the APGST Act, can discharge

such functions, under the IGST Act also, in relation to inter-state sales, only

when the State of Andhra Pradesh is entitled to an allocation of a share of the

tax , under section 17 of the IGST Act, in relation to such transaction.

D. A ―proper officer‘ appointed under the APGST Act, and assigned

the functions, under section 129 and/or 130, of the APGST Act, can not

42

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

discharge such functions, under the IGST Act, in relation to inter state sales,

which originate outside the State and culminate outside the State.

E. In the event of any discrepancies found, in any movement of

goods, under the IGST Act, it would be open to the State officer, to forward

the said discrepancies to the proper officer of the consignee and the proper

officer of the consignor, to take further action.

38. In view of the above, all these writ petitions are disposed of,

setting aside the proceedings initiated against the petitioners above, under

section 129 or 130, while leaving it open to the respondents to forward their

records, as well as the samples, that were directed by this court to be drawn,

in the interlocutory order, dated 16.02.2026, to the respective proper officers

of the petitioners.

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

There shall be no order as to costs.

________________________

R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

_______________

T.C.D. SEKHAR, J

RJS

43

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

&

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

WRIT PETITION NOs: 541, 1756, 3097, 3225, 3227, 3252, 3254, 3258 and

3354 of 2026

(per Hon‘ble Sri Justice R.Raghunandan Rao)

01.04.2026

RJS

44

RRR,J& TCDS,J

W.P.No.541 of 2026 & batch

Reference cases

Description

Legal Notes

Add a Note....