Saika Group vs. Union Territory Of Chandigarh And Ors

Facts

The petitioner, SAIKA GROUP, 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 revenue, represented by the Union Territory of Chandigarh and others, was the respondent. The specific tax period and the amount in dispute were not explicitly stated in the provided text. The procedural history indicates that this writ petition was disposed of based on previous judgments of the same court.

Held

The Court held that the issue raised in the present writ petition was squarely covered by its previous judgments in Luxmi Traders and The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. Consequently, the instant writ petition was disposed of in the same terms as those prior judgments. The reasoning implies that the court's previous pronouncements addressed the question of whether uploading notices and orders on the GST portal constitutes proper service under Section 169 of the GST Act, 2017. The ratio decidendi would be that such an upload, as per the established precedent, either does or does not constitute proper service, and this petition follows that precedent. The operative direction was to dispose of the writ petition in terms of the earlier judgments, and all pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of.

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 light 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. The revenue did not present a separate argument, as the parties were ad idem that the issue was concluded by previous judgments. The court noted that the present case was covered by its 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.