Shree Durga Steels Re Rolling Mills vs. State Of Punjab And Another

Held

The High Court held that the question of whether uploading a notice and an order-in-original on the GST portal under the 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tab constitutes proper service, in light of Section 169 read with Section 146 of the GST Act, 2017, was no longer res integra. The Court referred to its previous judgment in CWP-27139-2025, Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh and Others, which was further clarified by another judgment in CWP-15601-2026, The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. v. State of Haryana and Others, decided on 23.07.2026. As the present case was squarely covered by these prior decisions, the writ petition was disposed of in the same terms as those judgments. The specific findings or reasoning from the cited judgments were not detailed in the provided text, but the operative direction was to dispose of the petition based on the established precedent.

Facts

The petitioner, Shree Durga Steels Re Rolling Mills, 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 dispute revolves around the interpretation of Section 169 read with Section 146 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, concerning the method of service of official communications. The tax period and the specific authority that issued the notice and order are not explicitly stated in the provided text.

Key Issues

1. Whether uploading a notice and an order-in-original in the 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tab on the common GST portal (www.gst.gov.in) amounts to proper service on the petitioner, in terms of Section 169 read with Section 146 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that such an upload does not constitute proper service as per the relevant provisions of the GST Act. Revenue's Contention: The respondents (State of Punjab and another) did not present any specific arguments in the provided text. However, the Court noted that the parties were 'ad idem' (in agreement) that the issue was already decided by previous judgments of the High Court.