The Punjab & Haryana High Court, in M/s R. D. A. K. S. Industries Private Limited v. State of Haryana and Others, CWP-16934-2026 (O&M), decided on 27 July 2026, considered whether uploading a notice and an Order-in-Original under the tab “View Additional Notices and Orders” on the GST common portal amounts to valid service upon the taxpayer under Sections 169 and 146 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
The Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor observed that the controversy was already covered by the Court’s earlier judgment in Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh and Others, CWP-27139-2025, as subsequently clarified in The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. v. State of Haryana and Others, CWP-15601-2026, decided on 23 July 2026.
GST – Service of Notice and Order Through Common Portal
The principal issue concerned the legality of treating the mere uploading of a show-cause notice or adjudication order on the GST portal as sufficient service. The Court reiterated the principles laid down in Luxmi Traders, under which uploading a show-cause notice on the common portal by itself cannot be treated as sufficient service unless its receipt is acknowledged or the taxpayer responds to the notice.
Where a taxpayer has actually responded to the show-cause notice and contested the proceedings, however, an Order-in-Original passed thereafter cannot ordinarily be challenged merely on the ground of a defect in the mode of service of the notice or order through the portal. The Court’s earlier ruling therefore draws an important distinction between cases where the taxpayer had actual knowledge and participated in adjudication and cases resulting in ex parte proceedings without such participation.
The principles reiterated by the Court further provide that where a show-cause notice is only uploaded on the portal and no reply is filed, resulting in an ex parte adjudication order, the proceedings may be restored to the stage of the show-cause notice with an opportunity to respond. Similarly, where an Order-in-Original passed after contest is served only through portal uploading, such uploading by itself does not trigger the period of limitation for filing the statutory appeal. Appeals dismissed as time-barred on that basis may accordingly be restored for consideration on merits.
Finance Act, 2022 Amendment Does Not Alter the Position
The Revenue relied upon Section 115 of the Finance Act, 2022, which retrospectively amended the notification issued under Section 146 of the CGST Act so as to extend the functions capable of being performed on the common portal. The Court noted, however, that this aspect had already been examined in The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd.
In that decision, the Court observed that although the CGST Rules refer to the common portal for several functions—including registration, returns, payment, assessment, refund, advance ruling, appeals, recovery, e-way bills and e-invoicing—the Rules do not identify the common portal as a substitute for the prescribed mode of service of a show-cause notice or adjudication order. The Court therefore declined to depart from the principle laid down in Luxmi Traders merely because of the retrospective amendment introduced through the Finance Act, 2022.
Decision of the High Court
Finding that the controversy raised by R. D. A. K. S. Industries Private Limited was squarely covered by Luxmi Traders and The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd., the Punjab & Haryana High Court disposed of the writ petition in the same terms as those judgments. All pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of.
The decision is significant for GST appellate and adjudication procedure because it reinforces the distinction between merely making a document available somewhere on the GST portal and legally effective service upon the taxpayer. It also has consequences for natural justice and computation of limitation for statutory appeals, particularly where proceedings have continued ex parte or appeals have been rejected as delayed solely by treating the date of portal upload as the date of service.
Why Read This Judgment?
The ruling is relevant for Advocates, Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, GST Practitioners, Tax Consultants, Corporate Tax Teams and businesses dealing with GST adjudication and appellate proceedings. It provides important guidance on service under Section 169, use of the common portal under Section 146, ex parte GST orders, commencement of appellate limitation and the procedural consequences of defective service.