Want to File ITR, GST Returns & Pvt. Ltd. Registration

Circular No. 255/01/2026 – GST: GST Jurisdiction Transfer

by Shakshi Bharti | Jun 25, 2026 | GST, Circulars | 0 comments

Call @ +91-8512-022-044

Important Keyword: Circular No. 255/01/2026-GST, GST Jurisdiction Transfer, Migration of Taxable Person GST, GST Change of Jurisdiction, Transferor Jurisdiction GST, Transferee Jurisdiction GST, GST Pending Proceedings, GST Appeals after Migration, Principal Place of Business GST, CBIC Circular 255/01/2026, GST Jurisdiction Clarification, GST Audit Jurisdiction, GST Show, Cause Notice Jurisdiction, GST Adjudication Transfer, GST Compliance India, GST Legal Updates 2026, GST Return Filing, GST Registration,

Words: 2826 Read time: 15 minutes.

F. No. CBIC-20010/11/2026-GST
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs GST Policy Wing
*****

New Delhi, Dated the 25^th June, 2026

Circular No. 255/01/2026 - GST: Clarification regarding jurisdiction in cases involving migration/ transfer of taxable persons from one jurisdiction to another jurisdiction

To,

The Principal Chief Commissioners/ Chief Commissioners (All) The Principal Director General/ Director General (All)

Madam/Sir,

Subject: Clarification regarding jurisdiction in cases involving migration/ transfer of taxable persons from one jurisdiction to another jurisdiction– reg.

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 (hereinafter referred to as “CGST Act”) in cases where the jurisdiction of the taxable person has changed on account of change in Principal Place of Business of the taxable person.

Clarification has been sought on the following:

whether an action undertaken by the transferor jurisdictional authority, at a given stage of proceedings, before such migration/transfer of the taxable person to another jurisdiction, remains valid and applicable on the transferee jurisdiction authority;
- whether the transferor jurisdiction authority can take any action or initiate proceeding against the taxable person, after he has migrated/transferred to another jurisdiction (transferee); and

who would be the authority competent 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, in cases involving migration/transfer of the taxable person.
The matter has been examined in consultation with the Union Ministry of Law and Justice. In order to ensure uniformity in the implementation of procedure in such cases involving migration/transfer of taxable persons from one jurisdiction to another, the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (hereinafter referred to as "the Board"), hereby, issues the following clarifications in the matter.
The core issue, common to all the proceedings under the GST framework referred to in para 2 above, is a conflict between the validity of action already taken by the erstwhile (transferor) jurisdictional officer, and the need for the present (transferee) jurisdictional officer to have control over the proceeding once a taxable person has migrated/transferred to a different jurisdiction. 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. A subsequent migration/transfer of the taxable person does not retrospectively vitiate a proceeding already validly initiated or concluded by the erstwhile (transferor) jurisdictional officer, though it does affect who should conduct matters from that point forward.
Where an action corresponding to particular stage of proceedings (i.e. investigation, conducting audit, issuance of show cause notice, issuance of adjudication order, issuance of Order-in-review, filing of appeal, issuance of Order-in-Appeal, or any other proceedings under the CGST Act and the rules made thereunder) has been validly undertaken by the officer having jurisdiction over the registered taxpayer at that time (transferor), the action so taken remains valid, notwithstanding subsequent migration/transfer of the taxable person to another jurisdiction (transferee). The conduct of the next stage of proceedings, and the implementation of any directions contained in an action already taken or proceedings, is however to be undertaken by the officer presently having jurisdiction (transferee) over the taxable person, and not by the erstwhile (transferor) jurisdictional officer who, on account of the migration/transfer of the taxpayer, ceased to have jurisdiction thereon.

Judicial treatment of post-migration/transfer actions, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble High Courts in various of 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 (transferee) subsequent to such migration/ transfer. In such cases, it has been highlighted that continuing or consequent proceedings to any action, must be exercised by the authority currently having jurisdiction over the taxable person, after the said migration/transfer. Moreover, there is nothing to prevent the transferee jurisdictional authority from acting upon an earlier valid administrative or quasi-judicial action or proceeding initiated by the transferor jurisdictional authority. This indicates that the present jurisdictional authority (transferee) should be the face of proceedings at every subsequent stage after the migration/ transfer and wherever any action or proceeding had already been initiated by the transferor jurisdictional authority before the migration/ transfer, the transferee jurisdictional authority can rely on such action or proceeding already taken by the erstwhile jurisdictional authority (transferor).
Therefore, it is hereby clarified that:

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. 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.
The transferor jurisdiction authority shall not take any action or initiate proceedings against the taxable person, after he has migrated/ transferred to another jurisdiction and any issue that comes to the notice of the transferor jurisdictional authority should be intimated to the transferee jurisdictional authority for any further action.
Where the taxable person migrates to another jurisdiction during the pendency of any action or proceeding initiated by the transferor jurisdictional authority, the transferee jurisdictional authority shall take over and conclude the same from the stage at which it stood at the time of migration/ transfer, and shall be competent to take all further actions, including consequential proceedings that might arise therefrom. Thus, 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, in cases involving migration/transfer of the taxable person.
Difficulty, if any, in implementation of the above instructions may please be brought to the notice of the Board.

Yours faithfully,
(Gaurav Singh)
Commissioner (GST)

📚 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs): Circular No. 255/01/2026 - GST

Q1. What is Circular No. 255/01/2026-GST?

Answer:
Circular No. 255/01/2026-GST clarifies how GST proceedings should continue when a registered taxpayer shifts their Principal Place of Business and, as a result, their GST jurisdiction changes. It explains the validity of actions already taken by the previous jurisdictional officer, identifies which officer should handle pending proceedings, and clarifies who is responsible for appeals and consequential actions after migration.

Q2. Why did CBIC issue this circular?

Answer:
Many businesses actually face this issue after shifting their registered office or principal place of business to another State or Commissionerate. Field officers sought clarification on whether proceedings initiated by the previous jurisdiction remained valid and which officer should continue the case.
To remove this uncertainty and ensure uniform implementation across the country, CBIC issued this clarification after consulting the Union Ministry of Law and Justice.

Q3. Does a change in GST jurisdiction make earlier proceedings invalid?

Answer:
No. A change in jurisdiction does not invalidate proceedings that were lawfully initiated by the earlier jurisdictional officer.
In simple terms, if the transferor officer had jurisdiction on the date the action was taken, that action remains legally valid even after the taxpayer migrates to another jurisdiction. The transfer only affects who will handle the matter going forward, not the validity of past actions.

Q4. Can the previous jurisdictional officer continue proceedings after the taxpayer has migrated?

Answer:
No. Once the taxpayer has officially migrated to another jurisdiction, the previous (transferor) jurisdictional officer should not initiate fresh proceedings or continue exercising jurisdiction.
If any new issue comes to the notice of the transferor authority after migration, it must be communicated to the present (transferee) jurisdictional authority for appropriate action. This ensures that only the officer currently having jurisdiction deals with the taxpayer.

Q5. Who will complete pending GST proceedings after migration?

Answer:
The transferee jurisdictional authority becomes responsible for completing all pending proceedings from the stage at which they stood when the migration occurred.
Let’s understand this with an example. Suppose an audit has already resulted in a show cause notice before the taxpayer shifts to another jurisdiction. The new jurisdictional officer will continue the adjudication and complete the remaining proceedings instead of restarting the process.

Q6. Does this clarification apply only to investigations?

Answer:
No. The clarification applies to all stages of GST proceedings, including investigations, audits, show cause notices, adjudication orders, review orders, appeals, and any other proceedings under the CGST Act and the Rules.
If you look at it practically, the circular establishes one common principle for every stage—past valid actions remain valid, while future actions must be handled by the officer having current jurisdiction.

Q7. Who will file or defend GST appeals after jurisdiction changes?

Answer:
The transferee jurisdictional authority is responsible for filing appeals, defending pending matters, implementing appellate orders, and conducting all consequential proceedings after the taxpayer has migrated.
This avoids confusion over representation before appellate authorities or tribunals and ensures that one jurisdictional officer remains responsible for the case after the transfer.

Q8. Can the new jurisdictional officer rely on actions already taken by the previous officer?

Answer:
Yes. The circular specifically clarifies that the transferee jurisdictional authority may rely upon and act on proceedings validly initiated by the transferor authority.
The new officer is not required to repeat investigations or issue fresh notices merely because jurisdiction has changed. Instead, the pending proceedings continue seamlessly from the stage at which they stood before migration.

Q9. What is the main legal principle laid down in this circular?

Answer:
The circular establishes that jurisdiction must be determined on the date when the statutory power is exercised.
This means actions validly taken by a competent officer remain legally effective even after the taxpayer changes jurisdiction. However, once the migration takes place, all subsequent proceedings should be handled exclusively by the current jurisdictional authority. This principle applies uniformly across GST proceedings.

Q10. What practical impact does this circular have on businesses?

Answer:
The circular reduces procedural disputes whenever businesses relocate their principal place of business. Earlier, taxpayers often wondered whether notices, audits, or adjudication orders issued before migration remained valid.
Now, there is clarity that existing proceedings continue without interruption, while responsibility simply shifts to the new jurisdictional officer. This saves time, avoids duplication, and provides greater certainty during GST proceedings.
Related Resource:
GST Compliance: https://finodha.in/gst-compliance/