Ms Lira Constructions Private Limited vs. The Union Territory Of Chandigarh

Held

The Court held that the issue raised in the present writ petition was squarely covered by previous judgments of the High Court. Specifically, the Court referred to its decision in CWP-27139-2025, Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh and Others, and the subsequent clarification in CWP-15601-2026, The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. v. State of Haryana and Others. Based on these precedents, the Court found that the uploading of a notice and an order-in-original on the GST portal in the 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tab does not amount to proper service. The reasoning is that the matter was no longer res integra (undecided) and had been conclusively decided by the Court. The ratio decidendi is that service effected solely through uploading on the portal, without adherence to other prescribed modes of service under Section 169 of the GST Act, is not valid. The writ petition was disposed of in terms of the aforementioned judgments.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Lira Constructions Pvt Ltd, filed a writ petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court challenging the validity of service of a notice and an order-in-original. The petitioner contended that uploading these documents in the 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tab on the common GST portal (www.gst.gov.in) did not constitute proper service. The respondents were the Union Territory of Chandigarh and others. The tax period and the specific order-in-original are not explicitly stated. The procedural history involves the filing of this writ petition after the issuance of the notice and order.

Key Issues

1. Whether uploading of a notice and an order-in-original in the 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tab on the common portal (www.gst.gov.in) amounts to proper service on the petitioner, in view of Section 169 read with Section 146 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that such uploading does not constitute proper service as per the relevant provisions of the GST Act. The petitioner relied on the judgment of this Court in CWP-27139-2025, Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh and Others, and its clarification in CWP-15601-2026, The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. v. State of Haryana and Others. Revenue/State's Contention: The respondents did not present any arguments against the petitioner's position, as the parties were stated to be 'ad idem' (in agreement) that the issue was already decided by previous judgments of the Court.