CBIC clarifies appeal and review mechanism for GST orders passed by common adjudicating authorities

In a major procedural update to India’s indirect tax framework, the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has clarified the appeal, review, and revision mechanisms for Orders-in-Original (O-I-Os) passed by Common Adjudicating Authorities (CAAs) in cases investigated by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI).

The clarification, issued through a detailed circular dated June 24, addresses a critical gap in the GST post-adjudication process—one that had led to delays, jurisdictional confusion, and procedural lapses in high-value investigations involving tax evasion.

According to the new guidelines, the authorities responsible for reviewing and hearing appeals against such orders will be those under whose administrative control the CAAs (Joint or Additional Commissioners) are posted.

Who Gains, Who Loses

Winners:

Taxpayers: Clear appellate jurisdiction and timelines reduce legal uncertainty.

Tax administrators: Better role clarity and coordination between investigating and adjudicating arms.

DGGI formations: Gain formal consultation rights during reviews and revisions.

Losers:

Firms exploiting procedural gaps: The clarification leaves little room for delay tactics or jurisdictional disputes.

Adjudicating chaos: Forum shopping and conflicting orders will now be greatly reduced.

What Has Changed

Until now, there was no formal guidance on who could review or hear appeals against orders passed by CAAs—officers specifically designated to adjudicate DGGI cases under notification No. 02/2017. While Circular No. 239/33/2024-GST laid down the territorial jurisdiction of CAAs, it did not address post-adjudication processes.

This gap led CBIC to consult the Union Ministry of Law and Justice, resulting in the decisive clarification issued on Monday.

As per the New Circular:

Reviewing Authority (Section 107): The Principal Commissioner or Commissioner under whom the CAA is posted will review the order.

Revisional Authority (Section 108): The same officer will act as the revisional authority.

Appellate Authority: Appeals will lie with the Commissioner (Appeals) having jurisdiction over the CAA’s Commissionerate, as specified in the original 2017 notification.

Departmental Representation: The Principal Commissioner or Commissioner under whom the CAA is posted will represent the department in appeal proceedings and may designate officers accordingly.

Consultation with DGGI: Reviewing and revisional authorities may formally consult the relevant DGGI formation before deciding on any review or revision.

Growing Scope of DGGI Investigations

Over the past few years, the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) has significantly widened the scope of its investigations, targeting sectors with complex supply chains, digital business models, or aggressive tax positions, said Rajat Mohan, Senior Partner, AMRG & Associates.

“These include banking, insurance, online gaming, real estate, e-commerce, hospitality, FMCG, and logistics—each facing large-scale scrutiny involving multi-jurisdictional transactions and intricate valuation issues. While such investigations are essential for preserving the integrity of the GST regime, they have often resulted in procedural uncertainty for taxpayers, especially when show cause notices were adjudicated by Common Adjudicating Authorities (CAAs) without clarity on the appellate or revisional process. This created delays in legal remedy, compliance fatigue, and a risk of double jeopardy in cases spanning multiple states,” he added.

CBIC’s Circular No. 250/07/2025 provides long-awaited relief by clearly designating the appropriate reviewing, revisional, and appellate authorities based on the CAA’s territorial posting, Mohan added. For taxpayers, this brings predictability, faster resolution of disputes, and procedural safeguards—particularly relevant in recent high-stakes investigations involving fake ITC networks, offshore gaming portals, and shell-company-linked financial frauds.

He also said that this structural reform is a step toward restoring trust and balance in the enforcement process and is likely to significantly reduce litigation arising from technical jurisdictional errors. It also improves confidence among compliant businesses, especially in sectors that are under sustained regulatory watch.

Impact on Tax Administration

This clarification strengthens the GST enforcement framework. DGGI-initiated cases typically involve complex investigations into large-scale tax evasion, fraudulent input tax credit claims, or fake invoicing networks. These require swift adjudication and reliable appellate mechanisms.

By assigning specific responsibilities for reviews and appeals within the existing tax structure, the clarification is expected to:

Minimise procedural delays caused by jurisdictional ambiguities.

Increase administrative accountability by tying reviews and appeals to specific tax zones.

Enable timely departmental appeals, which are often delayed due to unclear responsibilities.

Promote consistency in legal interpretations across regions.

Senior officials noted that the change will help field formations and legal teams prepare better for appeals, strengthening the defence of tax positions.

What It Means for Taxpayers

For taxpayers facing DGGI investigations, the circular brings predictability. They now know exactly where to file an appeal, which authority to approach, and how their case will progress. This eliminates confusion and reduces uncertainty in litigation.

Tax professionals have welcomed the move as a much-needed procedural correction.

“It’s a good step. Now we won’t waste time figuring out where to appeal or whom to correspond with. It also keeps all parties—the taxpayer, the department, and the DGGI—on the same page,” said a GST practitioner advising several companies currently under investigation.

Next Steps

CBIC has directed all field formations to issue trade notices informing taxpayers of this development and to highlight any implementation challenges. The circular takes effect immediately.

As India’s GST system evolves, such administrative refinements are essential for reducing litigation backlogs and ensuring that the tax enforcement framework works efficiently for both the administration and taxpayers.

Source: CNBC TV18