Mavi Screening Plant vs. Union Of INDIA And Others
Facts
The petitioner, Mavi Screen Printing Plant, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana challenging the validity of service of a notice and an order-in-original. The core of the dispute revolved around whether uploading a notice and order-in-original on the common portal, www.gst.gov.in, under the tab ‘View Additional Notices and Orders’ constituted proper service. The revenue, represented by the Union of India and others, was the respondent. The specific tax period and the amount in dispute were not explicitly stated in the provided text. The procedural history indicates that this matter was brought before the High Court as a writ petition.
Held
The High Court held that the issue raised in the present writ petition was squarely covered by its previous judgments. Specifically, the Court referred to its decisions in CWP-27139-2025, Luxmi Traders and Others, and the subsequent clarification in CWP-15601-2026, The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. v. State of Haryana and Others. Based on these precedents, the Court concluded that the uploading of notices and orders on the GST portal under the specified tab constitutes proper service. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of in terms of these prior judgments.
Key Issues
1. Whether uploading of a notice as well as the order-in-original on the common portal, www.gst.gov.in, under the tab ‘View Additional Notices and Orders’ amounts to proper service, in view of Section 169 read with Section 146 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? The petitioner argued that the uploading of the notice and order-in-original on the GST portal did not constitute proper service. The revenue contended that such uploading did amount to proper service. Both parties were ad idem that the issue was no longer res integra and had been decided by previous judgments of the High Court.
Sections Cited
Section 169, Section 146
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
47 IN T
MAVI SCREEN UNION OF IND CORAM:- H
H
Present: M
M
f
M
w
M
f
* ASHWANI K
S petition is as original in th portal, being petitioner in v Services Tax
L case is no lon Court in CW Chandigarh this Court in v. State of Ha THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ AT CHANDIGARH
****
CWP
Date NING PLANT
VERSUS DIA AND OTHERS HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHI Mr. Varun Bansal, Advocate & Mr. Alok Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Sourabh Goel, Senior Standi with Ms. Himanshi Gautam, Adv Ms. Drishti Saraf, Advocate for respondent – Union of India. ***** KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. (Or Short question that requires s to whether uploading of a not he tab ‘View Additional Notices a g www.gst.gov.in amounts to p view of Section 169 read with S Act, 2017? Learned counsel for the parties nger res integra and stands concl WP-27139-2025, Luxmi Trade and Others. The said judgment CWP-15601-2026, The Amar C aryana and Others, decided on 2
JAB AND HARYANA
P-18351-2026 (O&M) e of Decision: 14.08.2026
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.