Sections 168 and 168A explained: this guide covers what it means, who it applies to, the step-by-step process, documents required, fees, due dates and penalties in India — so you can stay compliant with confidence and avoid costly mistakes.
One provision decides what a circular is worth. The other explains why demands for the earliest GST years are still being made.
Section 168(1): the Board may, for the purpose of uniformity in the implementation of this Act, issue orders, instructions or directions to the central tax officers, and all such officers and all other persons employed in the implementation of this Act shall observe and follow them. Section 168A(1): notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the Government may, on the recommendations of the Council, by notification, extend the time limit specified in, or prescribed or notified under, this Act in respect of actions which cannot be completed or complied with due to force majeure. 168A(2): that power includes the power to give retrospective effect to the notification, from a date not earlier than the commencement of the Act. The Explanation defines "force majeure" as war, epidemic, flood, drought, fire, cyclone, earthquake or any other calamity caused by nature or otherwise affecting the implementation of any provision of the Act.
Section 168: what a circular actually binds
Read the words. The instructions are issued "to the central tax officers", and it is "all such officers and all other persons employed in the implementation of this Act" who shall observe and follow them.
So a circular binds the department. It does not bind the taxpayer, and it does not bind a court or the Tribunal.
Three consequences.
A favourable circular is worth a great deal. Where a circular states a position in the taxpayer's favour, the officer is bound to follow it, and departing from it is a straightforward ground. The department cannot argue against its own circular before an adjudicating authority.
An unfavourable circular is not the law. It states the department's view. A taxpayer may take a different position, provided it is defensible and disclosed — and the circular is then an argument to be met, not an answer.
A circular cannot override the Act. Where a circular is inconsistent with a provision, the provision governs. That is a submission for the appellate forum rather than the adjudicating officer, who is bound by the circular.
Examples that recur in this cluster: Circular No. 199/11/2023-GST on cross charge and the deemed open market value; Circular No. 57/31/2018-GST on when Schedule I entry 3 applies to an agent; Circular No. 45/19/2018-GST on compensation cess refund for zero-rated suppliers; Circular No. 11/11/2017-GST on printing contracts.
And CBIC instructions carry the same character — Instruction No. 01/2022-23 dated 25.05.2022, stating that there is no provision permitting recovery during search, inspection or investigation, binds officers and is quotable against them. Spot recovery →
Section 168A: the provision behind the old-year demands
Why it exists. The COVID period disrupted both compliance and departmental action. Section 168A was inserted to allow time limits under the Act to be extended by notification where actions could not be completed due to force majeure.
What it can extend: any time limit specified in, or prescribed or notified under, this Act. That is very wide, and it has been used for the limitation periods for issuing orders under s.73(10) for the early financial years.
And retrospectively. Sub-section (2) expressly includes the power to give the notification retrospective effect, from a date not earlier than the commencement of the Act.
The practical consequence: a limitation computation for FY 2017-18 to FY 2020-21 done from the bare Act will be wrong. The s.73(10) three-year period for those years was extended by notification, and any limitation argument must be tested against the notification for the year concerned. The demand limitation map →
What to check, year by year:
- the annual return due date for the year, as itself extended;
- the s.73(10) or s.74(10) period computed from it;
- every s.168A notification applying to that year, and the extended date it produces;
- whether the notification's recitals engage the force majeure definition;
- whether the Council's recommendation preceded it, as sub-section (1) requires.
The force majeure definition, and where the argument lies
"War, epidemic, flood, drought, fire, cyclone, earthquake or any other calamity caused by nature or otherwise affecting the implementation of any of the provisions of this Act."
Two limbs. A named category, or "any other calamity caused by nature or otherwise" affecting implementation.
The second limb carries the weight, because it is not confined to natural events — "or otherwise". But it still requires a calamity that affects the implementation of the Act.
Where challenges to s.168A notifications have been mounted, the questions raised have been whether the circumstances at the time of the notification still amounted to force majeure within that definition, and whether the Council's recommendation preceded it as sub-section (1) requires.
For a taxpayer, the practical position is: an old-year limitation argument is worth taking only after examining the specific notification, its date, its recitals and its coverage — and the argument, if any, is about whether that notification was validly issued, not about the bare Act's periods.
Section 168(2): who may exercise the Commissioner's powers
Section 168(2) provides that the Commissioner specified in a list of provisions — including s.2(91), s.5(3), s.25(9)(b), s.35(3) and (4), s.37(1), s.39(6), s.44, and others — shall mean a Commissioner or Joint Secretary posted in the Board, and such Commissioner or Joint Secretary shall exercise the powers specified in the said sections with the approval of the Board.
Why it matters. Several provisions in this cluster confer powers on the "Commissioner" — extending an audit under s.65(4), allowing instalments under s.80, nominating a special auditor under s.66(1), attaching property under s.83, compounding under s.138. Section 168(2) identifies which of those "Commissioner" references mean a Board-level officer acting with the Board's approval, rather than a jurisdictional Commissioner.
Where an order recites the exercise of a power by "the Commissioner", it is worth checking which Commissioner the provision means, and whether the required approval exists.
Key takeaways
- Section 168 circulars bind officers, not taxpayers and not courts.
- A favourable circular is directly enforceable against the department; an unfavourable one is an argument to be met.
- A circular cannot override the Act.
- Section 168A allows the Government, on the Council's recommendations, to extend any time limit under the Act for force majeure, retrospectively.
- Limitation for FY 2017-18 to FY 2020-21 must be computed against the s.168A notifications, not the bare Act.
- Section 168(2) identifies where "Commissioner" means a Board-level officer acting with the Board's approval.
Read next
- The GST Demand Limitation Map: Sections 73, 74 and 74A
- Section 160: When a Defect Does Not Invalidate a Proceeding
- Spot Recovery During a GST Search Is Not Voluntary
- Section 161: Rectification of Errors Apparent on the Record
Disclaimer: Positions stated as on 5 September 2026, based on the CGST Act as amended to 31 March 2026 (ICAI Bare Law, 12th edition). Extensions under section 168A operate by notification and must be verified for the year concerned; challenges to such notifications are stated in general terms.