M/S Leather Point vs. State Of Punjab And Others
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Leather Point, 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 to the 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tab on the GST portal (www.gst.gov.in) constituted proper service under Section 169 read with Section 146 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner sought a determination on this specific mode of communication as valid service. The procedural history indicates this is a writ petition filed directly before the High Court.
Held
The Court held that the issue raised in the present 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-27139-2021, 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. The ratio decidendi is that the manner of service, as disputed in this case, has been definitively addressed and settled by these prior pronouncements. 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 petitioner's challenge to the service was likely decided in their favor based on the precedent.
Key Issues
1. Whether uploading a notice and an order-in-original to the 'View Additional Notices and Orders' tab on the www.gst.gov.in portal amounts to proper service in view of Section 169 read with Section 146 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the uploading of the notice and order-in-original to the specified tab on the GST portal does not constitute proper service as per the relevant provisions of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner relied on previous judgments of the High Court to support their stance. Revenue's Contention: The respondents, the State of Punjab and Others, and the Union of India, did not record any specific arguments in the judgment. However, the judgment indicates that the parties were 'ad idem' (in agreement) that the issue was no longer res integra and stood concluded by prior judgments of the Court.
Sections Cited
Section 169, Section 146
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
213
I
M/s Leather State of Punj
CORAM: H
H
Present M M f
M M M M *
ASHWANI KU
S petition is as original in th portal, being petitioner in and Services
L present case judgment of Territory of IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ CHANDIGARH
Date of r Point
V jab and Others
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF J HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT K Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Sr. Advocat Mr. Rishab Singla, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Addl. A.G., Mr. Sourabh Goel, Senior Stand Ms. Himanshi Gautam, Advocat Ms. Drishti Saraf, Advocate for **** UMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. (Oral) Short question that requires s to whether uploading of a no he tab ‘View Additional Notices g www.gst.gov.in amounts to n view of Section 169 read wi Tax Act, 2017? Learned counsel for the par e is no longer res integra an this Court in CWP-27139-202 f Chandigarh and Others. T
JAB AND HARYANA AT H CWP-18949-2025 (O&M) f Decision:14thAugust, 2026. .…...Petitioner(s) V/s ......Respondent(s) JUSTICE KAPOOR te and , Punjab. ding Counsel, UOI, with te, and the respondent(s)-UOI. consideration in this writ otice as well as the order-in- and Orders’, on the common proper service of it, on the th Section 146 of the Goods rties are ad idem that the nd stands concluded by the 25, Luxmi Traders v. Union he said judgment has been VANDANA YADAV 2026.08.21 10:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-18949-2025 (O&M) further clarified by this Court in CWP-15601-2026, The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. 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.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.
[ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA] ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
[ROHIT KAPOOR] JUDGE
August 14, 2026 Rajesh/Vandana Yadav
Whether speaking / reasoned :
Yes / No Whether Reportable
:
Yes / No VANDANA YADAV 2026.08.21 10:17 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.