Ms Buta Ram Tilak Raj vs. State Of Punjab And Others

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Buta Ram Tilak Raj, filed a writ petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court challenging the service of a notice and an order-in-original. The core of the dispute was whether uploading these documents in the 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tab on the common GST portal (www.gst.gov.in) constituted proper service on the petitioner, in light of Section 169 read with Section 146 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The revenue was represented by the State of Punjab and another respondent. The tax period and the specific amount in dispute were not explicitly stated in the provided text. The procedural history leading to the High Court's consideration involved the petitioner's challenge to the method of service.

Held

The Court held that the question raised in the writ petition was no longer res integra and stood concluded by previous judgments of the High Court. Specifically, the Court referred to its decision in CWP-27139-2025, Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh and Others, and the subsequent clarification in CWP-15601-2026, The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. v. State of Haryana and Others. The reasoning was that these prior judgments squarely covered the issue of whether uploading notices and orders on the GST portal constituted proper service. Consequently, the instant writ petition was disposed of in the same terms as those previous judgments. The operative direction was to dispose of the writ petition in line with the aforementioned precedents. No specific issue was left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether uploading 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 of such notice and order on the petitioner, in terms of Section 169 read with Section 146 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? The petitioner contended that such an upload does not constitute proper service. The revenue's specific arguments were not detailed, but the court noted that parties were 'ad idem' that the issue was concluded by prior judgments. The court relied on its previous 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, which clarified the issue.