Suvidha International vs. State Of Haryana And Others

Original PDF →

CWP/30132/2025HC Punjab and HaryanaGSTCNR PHHC01162223202514 August 2026Bench: JUSTICE (TO BE NOMINATED),MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Suvidha International, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana challenging the service of a notice and an order-in-original. The core of the dispute revolved around whether uploading a notice on the GST portal under the tab 'View Additional Notices and Orders' constituted proper service under Section 169 of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act, 2017. The petitioner contested the validity of the service, implying that they had not received adequate notice of the proceedings. The respondents included the State of Haryana and others, representing the revenue authorities.

Held

The High Court held that the issue raised in the present writ petition is no longer res integra and has been concluded by previous judgments of the Court. Specifically, the Court referred to its decision in CWP-27139-2025, Luxmi Traders and Others, and a subsequent clarification in CWP-15601-2026, The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. v. State of Haryana and Others. These judgments have already determined that uploading of notices on the GST portal under the 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tab amounts to proper service under Section 169 read with Section 146 of the GST Act, 2017. Consequently, the instant writ petition was disposed of in the same terms as the aforementioned concluded cases, implying that the service was deemed proper. No specific amount in dispute was mentioned.

Key Issues

1. Whether uploading of a notice on the GST portal under the tab ‘View Additional Notices and Orders’ amounts to proper service in view of Section 169 read with Section 146 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner contended that the mere uploading of a notice on the GST portal does not constitute proper service, implying a lack of actual notice and therefore a violation of procedural fairness. While not explicitly detailed in the judgment, the petitioner's stance implicitly questions the adequacy of electronic service as defined by the Act. Revenue's Argument: The respondents, including the Union of India and the State of Haryana, argued that the uploading of notices on the GST portal, as per the relevant provisions of the GST Act, constitutes valid service. They relied on previous judgments of the High Court that have addressed similar issues of electronic service.

Sections Cited

Section 169, Section 146

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

213.205 IN T M/S SUVIDHA STATE OF HA CORAM:- H H Present: M M f M w M f M f * ASHWANI K 1. S petition is as original in th portal, being petitioner in v Services Tax 2. L case is no lon Court in CW Chandigarh this Court in THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ AT CHANDIGARH. **** CWP Date A INTERNATIONAL VERSUS ARYANA AND OTHERS HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHI Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Senior Advo Mr. Rishab Singla, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Sourabh Goel, Senior Standi with Ms. Himanshi Gautam, Adv Ms. Drishti Saraf, Advocate for respondent – Union of India. Mr. Sourabh Goel, Addl. A.G., H for respondent - State. ***** KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. (Or Short question that requires s to whether uploading of a not he tab ‘View Additional Notices a g www.gst.gov.in amounts to p view of Section 169 read with S Act, 2017? Learned counsel for the parties nger res integra and stands concl WP-27139-2025, Luxmi Trade

and Others. The said judgment CWP-15601-2026, The Amar C

JAB AND HARYANA

P-30132-2025 (O&M) e of Decision: 14.08.2026 ....PETITIONER(S)

….RESPONDENT(S) F JUSTICE IT KAPOOR ocate assisted by ing Counsel, CBIC/UOI vocate &

Haryana ral) consideration in this writ tice as well as the order-in- and Orders’, on the common proper service of it, on the Section 146 of the Goods and are ad idem that the present luded by the judgment of this ers v. Union Territory of has been further clarified by Cooperative LC Society Ltd. KAVNEET SINGH 2026.08.20 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-30132-2025 (O&M)

v. State of Haryana and Others, decided on 23.07.2026. 3. As the issue raised in this case is squarely covered by the judgments rendered by this Court in Luxmi Traders (supra) as further clarified in The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd (supra), the instant writ petition is disposed of in the same terms.

All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

[ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA]

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

[ROHIT KAPOOR]

JUDGE AUGUST 14, 2026

kavneet singh

Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No 2. Whether Reportable Yes/No

KAVNEET SINGH 2026.08.20 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.