Jas Forwarding Worldwide Private Limited vs. Union Of INDIA And Others

Facts

The petitioner, Jas Forwarding Worldwide Pvt. Ltd., 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 core of the dispute revolved around 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, as per Section 169 read with Section 146 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The revenue authorities are the respondents. The specific tax periods and the amount in dispute are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The procedural history is that this writ petition was filed seeking adjudication on the aforementioned service issue.

Held

The Court held that the issue raised in the present writ petition was squarely covered by its previous judgments. 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, decided on 23.07.2026. The reasoning implies that these prior judgments established the legal position on whether uploading notices and orders on the GST portal constitutes 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 precedents. No specific issue was left undecided; rather, the Court found the matter concluded by existing case law.

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 argued that such an upload does not constitute proper service. The revenue, represented by the State of Haryana and Union of India, contended that this method of service is valid. The parties agreed that the issue was no longer res integra and had been previously decided by this Court. The petitioner relied on the judgment in CWP-27139-2025, Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh and Others, and its subsequent clarification in CWP-15601-2026, The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. v. State of Haryana and Others.