CBIC Issues Officer-Wise Monetary Thresholds For Tax Determination & Penalty Proceeding Under GST Regime
Sangeetha Prathap
The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has issued Circular No. 254/11/2025-GST dated 27 October 2025, prescribing clear officer-wise monetary limits for issuance of show cause notices (SCNs) and adjudication orders under Sections 74A, 75(2) and 122 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
The Board observed that no specific proper officers had been assigned until now for tax determination under Section 74A, reassessment under Section 75(2) where charges of fraud are not upheld, penalty-only proceedings under Section 122, and issuance of DRC-01A pre-notice intimations under Rule 142(1A). The circular resolves this ambiguity by notifying designated officers for adjudication across these provisions.
According to the circular, the rank of the officer empowered to act as the proper officer will depend on the monetary value involved in the proceedings. Superintendents, Deputy/Assistant Commissioners, and Joint/Additional Commissioners have been assigned jurisdiction based on monetary thresholds. The notification also clarifies that jurisdiction will be determined based on the combined amount of CGST + IGST + cess, rather than their individual values.
The circular specifies that cases under Section 74A will be adjudicated based on the following limits: matters up to ₹20 lakh will be handled by the Superintendent; matters above ₹20 lakh and up to ₹2 crore will be adjudicated by the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner; and matters exceeding ₹2 crore will fall under the jurisdiction of the Additional/Joint Commissioner. These same thresholds apply to penalty-only proceedings under Section 122 of the CGST Act.
A further clarification has been issued for penalty-only SCNs under Section 122 where both CGST and IGST are involved. In such cases, jurisdiction will be determined only based on the combined penalty amount and not the individual components, even when the separate tax components exceed the prescribed limit of a lower-ranked officer.
The circular also addresses situations where appellate authorities rule that fraud or wilful misstatement is not established in a notice issued under Section 74. In such cases, the same adjudicating authority must re-determine the tax under Section 73 in accordance with Section 75(2), ensuring continuity of proceedings instead of shifting jurisdiction to another officer.
Also Read: IBBI Issues New Framework for Appointing Insolvency Professionals, Effective January 2026
By clarifying officer-wise jurisdiction and combining the tax components for threshold calculation, the circular seeks to prevent issuance of notices by officers lacking statutory authority and to ensure uniformity in departmental adjudication. The instructions have been circulated to all field formations with a direction to issue suitable trade notices for wider dissemination.
