Authorisation of officers of State tax or Union territory tax as proper officer in certain circumstances
Section 6, CGST Act
Straight from CBIC
Official source, not a summary of a summary
Full text included
Read the exact words of the law yourself
Amendment history
See what changed, and when
Free, always
No login, no paywall, no book to buy
In one line
Section 6 provides cross-empowerment: officers of the State/UT GST are also treated as proper officers for CGST (and vice-versa), so a taxpayer is not subjected to parallel proceedings by both administrations on the same subject.
What this means in practice
The parts that actually decide cases — the things a practitioner checks first.
Cross-empowerment: State and central officers are proper officers under each other’s Acts, but section 6(2)(b) bars a second proceeding on the SAME SUBJECT MATTER once one authority has initiated one.
‘Same subject matter’ means the same issue for the same period, not merely the same taxpayer – so a State audit for FY 2020-21 does not bar a central investigation into a different issue.
Where both authorities issue notices on the same issue and period, the later one is liable to be quashed – raise it at the reply stage with the earlier notice annexed.
Questions people actually ask
Real questions we get on this provision, answered straight.
We have received notices from both the State and the central authorities for the same year.+
Check whether they cover the same subject matter. If they do, section 6(2)(b) bars the second proceeding and the later notice should be dropped – reply to it with a copy of the earlier notice and ask for it to be withdrawn. If the issues are genuinely different, both can proceed.
How this provision is built
The skeleton, clause by clause — useful when a notice cites a specific sub-clause.
The exact words of the law
1,506 characters, uneditedReproduced from the CBIC text. We explain it above — but you should always be able to read it yourself.
Read the full provision+
(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.
(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.
High Court cases on this section
Judgments in our index that cite this provision. Being listed does not make a case good law — it may have been appealed or distinguished since. Read it before relying on it.
SAGAR GHOSH v. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF STATE GST AND ORS
Read the judgment PDF →
M/s Abarna Enterprises, v. The Deputy State Tax Officer-1/The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer,
Read the judgment PDF →
M/s. V M and Co., v. The State Tax Officer
Read the judgment PDF →
AMBRISH NATH TIWARI v. UOI THRU. DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE LKO.
Read the judgment PDF →
VIKAS SINGH v. U.O.I. THRU. DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE LKO. ZONAL UNIT
Read the judgment PDF →
Ms VST Tillers Tractors Limited v. The Assistant commissioner (ST)
Read the judgment PDF →
M/S PRASHANTH MOTORS v. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (ENF)17
Read the judgment PDF →
M/S KOHILO SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED v. THE COMMERCIAL TAXES OFFICER
Read the judgment PDF →
26 more on record. Search all GST case law →
What changed, and when
The amendment trail, newest first — because the version that applies to your case depends on the period.
2017-07-01 · Commenced
Provision as originally enacted in the CGST Act, 2017 (Act 12 of 2017) and brought into force w.e.f. 01-07-2017.
Where this comes from
Text reproduced from the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, as available on 2026-09-05. The explanation and practice notes above are GSTZone’s own, written for this hub. If you spot anything out of date, tell us and we’ll fix it — this hub is checked daily against CBIC.
Reading is free. Getting it wrong isn’t.
Does this apply to your case, or not?
Reading the section is one thing. Knowing whether it bites on your facts, and what it costs if it does, is another. Send us the situation – we will tell you straight, and only take it on if we can genuinely help.
6+ years · 2,500+ GST registrations filed · Bhopal, serving all of India