Naveen Goel vs. State Of Haryana And Others

Held

The High Court held that the question raised in the present writ petition was no longer res integra and had been concluded by previous judgments of the Court. Specifically, the Court referred to its decision 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. The Court found that the issue in the current petition was squarely covered by these prior rulings. Consequently, the instant writ petition was disposed of in the same terms as the aforementioned judgments. The operative direction was to dispose of the writ petition in line with the precedents, implying that the petitioner's contention regarding improper service was likely upheld based on the cited judgments. No specific amount in dispute was mentioned.

Facts

The petitioner, Naveen Goel, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana challenging the validity of service of a notice and an order-in-original. The petitioner contended that uploading these documents on the common GST portal under the tab ‘View Additional Notices and Orders’ did not constitute proper service. The revenue, represented by the State of Haryana and others, was the respondent. The tax period is not specified. The core of the dispute revolves around the interpretation of Section 169 read with Section 146 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, concerning the mode of service of official communications.

Key Issues

1. Whether uploading of a notice and an order-in-original in the tab ‘View Additional Notices and Orders’ 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? The petitioner argued that such an upload does not constitute proper service as per the relevant provisions of the GST Act. The revenue did not present any specific arguments, but the court noted that both parties were ad idem that the issue was concluded by previous judgments. The court relied on its own prior decisions in CWP-27139-2025, Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh and Others, and CWP-15601-2026, The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. v. State of Haryana and Others, which had clarified the position on this matter.