M/S Partap Singh vs. State Of Haryana And Others

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Partap Singh, 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 on the common GST portal under the 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tab did not constitute proper service. The revenue, represented by the State of Haryana and others, was the respondent. The specific tax period and the amount in dispute are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history indicates that this writ petition was filed seeking a determination on the mode of service under the GST Act.

Held

The Court held that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by previous judgments of the same Court. Specifically, the Court referred to its decision in CWP-27139-2025, Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh and Others, and a subsequent clarification in CWP-15601-2026, The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. v. State of Haryana and Others, decided on 23.07.2026. The ratio decidendi from these precedents would be that service effected by uploading notices and orders on the GST portal under the designated tab is either not proper service or is to be interpreted in a manner consistent with the principles laid down in those judgments. Consequently, the instant writ petition was disposed of in the same terms as the aforementioned judgments. No specific operative directions are detailed, but the implication is that the petitioner's challenge would be decided in line with the prior rulings.

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? The petitioner argued that such uploading does not constitute proper service. The revenue's contentions are not explicitly recorded, but the court notes that the parties are 'ad idem' that the issue is no longer res integra. The court's reference to previous judgments implies the revenue likely argued that the portal upload constitutes valid service as per the relevant sections of the GST Act.