CBIC clarification

 The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has issued Circular No. 255/12/2025-GST, providing much-needed clarity on the jurisdiction of tax authorities in cases where a registered taxpayer undergoes a change in GST jurisdiction due to administrative restructuring or migration. 

The circular specifies that proceedings initiated prior to such a transfer—including audits, assessments, investigations, adjudication and recovery actions—shall ordinarily continue with the original jurisdictional authority unless specifically reassigned in accordance with the prescribed procedure. By eliminating ambiguity over the competent authority to handle pending proceedings, the clarification is expected to reduce procedural disputes, avoid duplication of efforts and ensure continuity in tax administration.

Taxpayers with ongoing GST litigation or compliance proceedings should review the applicability of the circular and update their internal records to facilitate seamless interaction with the appropriate jurisdictional authorities.

GSTAT appeal

 The introduction of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) marked the completion of a long-awaited appellate mechanism under the GST regime. Although envisaged under the CGST Act, 2017, the Tribunal became operational only in 2025, leaving thousands of second appeals pending for several years. To address this transition, the Government had earlier prescribed 30 June 2026 as the outer deadline for filing eligible legacy appeals before the Tribunal.

With taxpayers rushing to meet the deadline, the GSTAT portal witnessed an unprecedented surge in filings—around 30,000 appeals in the last fortnight alone, with daily filings touching nearly 5,500—leading to technical difficulties and representations from stakeholders. In response, the Ministry of Finance has extended the deadline to 31 July 2026 for specified appeals under Section 112 of the CGST Act.

The extension is a pragmatic relief for taxpayers and professionals, but it should not be viewed as an invitation to defer filings. The additional month should instead be utilised to ensure accurate computation of pre-deposit requirements, compilation of supporting documents, and timely e-filing, thereby avoiding the last-minute rush that prompted the extension in the first plac