Ms Sunrise Construction vs. State Of Punjab And Others
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Sunrise Construction, 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 revenue, represented by the State of Punjab and others, was the respondent. The specific tax period and the amount in dispute are not recorded in the judgment. The procedural history indicates that this writ petition was filed before the High Court.
Held
The Court held that the issue raised in the present writ petition is no longer res integra and stands concluded by the judgment of this Court in CWP-27139-2025, Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh and Others. This judgment was 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. As the issue is squarely covered by these previous judgments, the instant writ petition is disposed of in the same terms. The operative direction is to dispose of the writ petition in line with the cited precedents. The specific findings or reasoning from the Luxmi Traders and Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. judgments regarding the interpretation of Section 169 read with Section 146 of the GST Act are not detailed in this judgment, but the principle is that the issue is settled by those decisions.
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 Contention: The petitioner argued that such uploading does not constitute proper service. The judgment does not explicitly detail the petitioner's arguments beyond this central contention. Revenue's Contention: The revenue's stance is not explicitly detailed in the judgment, but it is implied that they would argue for the validity of service through the portal. The judgment notes that the parties are 'ad idem' that the issue is concluded by previous judgments.
Sections Cited
Section 169, Section 146
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
213 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-9481-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 14.08.2026 M/S SUNRISE CONSTRUCTION ....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ….RESPONDENT(S) CORAM:- HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR Present: Mr. Tarang Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Sourabh Goel, Sr. Standing Counsel, UOI, Ms. Geetika Sharma, Advocate, Ms. Himanshi Gautam, Advocate, and Ms. Drishti Saraf, Advocate for the respondents/Revenue. ***** 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 Chandigarh and Others. The said judgment has been further clarified by this Court in CWP-15601-2026, The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. MOHIT GOYAL 2026.08.20 11:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-9481-2025 (O&M)
2 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 Mohit Goyal
Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No 2. Whether Reportable Yes/No MOHIT GOYAL 2026.08.20 11:55 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.