Ashok Kumar vs. State Of Haryana And Others

Facts

The petitioner, Ashok Kumar, 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 revenue, represented by the State of Haryana and others, issued these documents. The core of the dispute revolves around whether uploading these documents in the 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tab on the common GST portal (www.gst.gov.in) constitutes proper service on the petitioner, as per Section 169 read with Section 146 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The specific tax period and the amount in dispute are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The procedural history indicates this is a writ petition.

Held

The High Court held that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered 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, 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 Court found no reason to deviate from the principles laid down in these precedents. 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 prior rulings, implying that the relief granted or the finding on the validity of service would mirror those earlier decisions. No specific issue was expressly left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether uploading 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's contention, as implied by the framing of the issue, is that such uploading does not constitute proper service. The revenue's contention is not explicitly recorded, but the court's reliance on previous judgments suggests they likely argued that the portal upload is a valid mode of service under the GST Act. The court noted that the parties are ad idem (in agreement) that the issue is no longer res integra (undecided) and has been concluded by prior judgments of the High Court.