M/S Tst Infrastructure Co vs. State Of Haryana And Others
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s TST Infrastructure Co., Nuh, 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 in the ‘View Additional Notices and Orders’ tab on the common portal, www.gst.gov.in, does not constitute proper service. The respondents are the State of Haryana and others, including the Union of India. The specific tax period and the amount in dispute are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history leading to this writ petition is not detailed.
Held
The Court held that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by previous judgments of the High Court. Specifically, the Court referred to its own judgment 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 judgments, which the current case follows, likely establishes the criteria for valid service under Section 169 of the GST Act, 2017, particularly concerning electronic modes of communication. As the present case is concluded by these precedents, the Court did not delve into a fresh analysis of the facts or legal provisions. The operative direction was to dispose of the writ petition in the same terms as the cited judgments.
Key Issues
1. Whether uploading of a notice and an order-in-original in the tab ‘View Additional Notices and Orders’ 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 Contention: The petitioner argued that such uploading does not constitute proper service. Revenue/State's Contention: The respondents did not record any specific arguments in the judgment. However, the judgment notes that the parties are ad idem that the issue is concluded by previous judgments of the High Court. The respondents likely rely on the interpretation of Section 169 and Section 146 of the GST Act as applied in the cited precedents.
Sections Cited
Section 169, Section 146
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 213-328 Date of Decision: 1 Date of Decision: 1 Date of Decision: 1 Date of Decision: 14.08.2026 .08.2026 .08.2026 .08.2026
M/S TST INFRASTRUCTURE CO., NUH ....PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ….RESPONDENT(S) CORAM:- HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR ***** Present: Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rishab Singla, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Sourabh Goel, Addl. A.G. Haryana.
Mr. Sourabh Goel, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms. Himanshi Gautam, Advocate &
Ms.Drishti Saraf, Advocate for respondents- UOI. ***** ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. (Oral)
Short question that requires consideration in this writ petition is as to whether uploading of a notice as well as the order-in- original in the tab ‘View Additional Notices and Orders’, on the common portal, being www.gst.gov.in amounts to proper service of it, on the petitioner in view of Section 169 read with Section 146 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017?
Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the present case is no longer res integra and stands concluded by the judgment of this Court in CWP-27139-2025, Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh and Others Chandigarh and Others Chandigarh and Others Chandigarh and Others. The said judgment has been further clarified by this Court in CWP-15601-2026, The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. v. State of Haryana and Others v. State of Haryana and Others v. State of Haryana and Others v. State of Haryana and Others, decided on 23.07.2026. RAJ KUMAR 2026.08.20 11:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document -2-
As the issue raised in this case is squarely covered by the judgments rendered by this Court in Luxmi Traders Luxmi Traders Luxmi Traders Luxmi Traders (supra) as further clarified inThe Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd (supra), the instant writ petition is disposed of disposed of disposed of disposed of in the same terms.
( ( ( ( ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA ) ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA ) ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA ) ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA ) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
14 14 14 14.08. .08. .08. .08.2026 2026 2026 2026 ‘raj’ ( ROHIT KAPOOR ) ( ROHIT KAPOOR ) ( ROHIT KAPOOR ) ( ROHIT KAPOOR ) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes
No Whether Reportable:
Yes
No RAJ KUMAR 2026.08.20 11:06 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.