Jindal Enterprises vs. State Of Haryana And Others

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Jindal Enterprises, filed a writ petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court challenging the validity of service of a notice under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act. The core of the dispute revolved around whether uploading a notice on the GST portal, specifically under the 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tab on www.gst.gov.in, constituted proper service on the petitioner, in light of Section 169 read with Section 146 of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner sought to have the notice treated as duly served. The court was also considering an application under Section 151 of the CPC for disposal in terms of a previous judgment.

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 own 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, decided on 23.07.2026. These judgments had already clarified the position regarding the validity of service through the GST portal. Consequently, the instant writ petition was disposed of in the same terms as those prior judgments. The Court did not provide a fresh analysis of the legal provisions but relied on its established precedents. The operative direction was to dispose of the petition in line with the aforementioned judgments.

Key Issues

1. Whether uploading of a notice, including an order-in-original, on the common portal of the GST website, under the 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tab, amounts to proper service of the notice on the petitioner, in view of Section 169 read with Section 146 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? The petitioner contended that the uploading of the notice on the GST portal did not constitute proper service. The revenue, represented by the State of Haryana, argued that such an upload, as per the relevant provisions of the GST Act, is indeed a valid mode of service. The parties agreed that the issue was no longer res integra and was concluded by previous judgments of the High Court.