Deepak Sales Corporation vs. Union Of INDIA And Others

Facts

The petitioner, Deepak Sales Corporation, 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 on the common GST portal under the 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tab did not constitute proper service. The respondents were the Union of India and other revenue authorities. The tax period is not specified. The core of the dispute revolves around the interpretation of Section 169 read with Section 146 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, concerning the method of service of official communications. The procedural history indicates this is a writ petition.

Held

The Court held that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by previous judgments of the same 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 ratio decidendi from these precedents would be that uploading of notices and orders on the GST portal under the specified tab constitutes proper service. Consequently, the 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 the petitioner's challenge to the service was not upheld. No specific amount in dispute was mentioned, and no issues were expressly left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether uploading of 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 on the petitioner, in view of Section 169 read with Section 146 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that mere uploading of documents on the GST portal does not constitute proper service as per the relevant provisions of the GST Act. The petitioner likely relies on a strict interpretation of service requirements to argue that actual notice or a more formal method of service was necessary. Revenue's Argument: The respondents (Union of India and others) contended that uploading documents on the common portal is a valid mode of service. They likely relied on the same provisions of the GST Act and possibly previous judicial pronouncements that have interpreted these provisions. The judgment notes that the parties are 'ad idem' that the case is concluded by previous judgments, implying the revenue's stance aligns with those precedents.