Facts of the Case

M/s Carlsberg India Pvt. Ltd. filed this writ petition against the Commissioner (Appeals), Office of the Commissioner (Appeals), CGST, Gurugram, in a dispute arising from a notice and order-in-original that had been made available to it only through the “View Additional Notices and Orders” tab of the GST common portal (www.gst.gov.in), rather than the tab an assessee would ordinarily check. The short question before the Acting Chief Justice and Justice Rohit Kapoor was whether such uploading amounts to proper service under Section 169 read with Section 146 of the CGST Act, 2017. The Court noted this very question already stood concluded by its own decisions in Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh (CWP-27139-2025) and its clarification in The Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd. v. State of Haryana (CWP-15601-2026, decided 23.07.2026).

Issues Involved

  1. Whether uploading of an SCN/order-in-original only under the “View Additional Notices and Orders” tab of the common portal amounts to valid service under Section 169 read with Section 146 of the CGST Act, 2017.
  2. Whether Section 115 of the Finance Act, 2022 (retrospectively validating the Common Portal notification) cures this defect for service purposes.
  3. The relief that follows where such defective service has led to an ex parte order or a time-barred appeal.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The SCN and order-in-original were never effectively communicated, since they appeared only under the “Additional Notices and Orders” tab.
  • The issue was squarely covered by Luxmi Traders and Amar Cooperative LC Society Ltd., which had already rejected the Revenue's reliance on Section 115 of the Finance Act, 2022 for this very purpose.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Revenue urged that Luxmi Traders was decided without the benefit of Section 115 of the Finance Act, 2022, which retrospectively empowered the Government to extend all functions under the CGST Rules, 2017 — including service — to the Common Portal, and that this changes the legal position.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court held that none of the provisions of the CGST Rules, 2017 refer to the Common Portal for the specific purpose of service of an SCN or order; the Rules confine the Portal's use to limited functions such as registration, return filing and payment.
  • Reproducing paragraphs 58–60 of Luxmi Traders, the Bench reiterated that mere uploading on the Common Portal, without acknowledgment or a reply, does not amount to sufficient service; ex parte orders following such defective service must be restored to the SCN stage, and appeals dismissed as time-barred on this basis must be restored to be heard on merits.
  • The Bench declined to depart from Luxmi Traders merely because of Section 115 of the Finance Act, 2022, holding the amendment does not expressly extend to service of SCNs/orders.
  • The petition was disposed of in terms of Luxmi Traders, with a further direction that where 10% statutory pre-deposit had already been made at the time of filing an appeal, that appeal shall be heard on merits, and any bank-account attachment consequent to the challenged order shall stand revoked.

Important Clarification

  • Uploading a notice or order solely under the “Additional Notices and Orders” tab of the GST portal, without any other mode of communication under Section 169, does not amount to valid service; the retrospective notification under Section 115 of the Finance Act, 2022 does not, by itself, legitimise such service, since none of the CGST Rules, 2017 designates the Common Portal for this purpose.

Sections Involved

  • Section 169 of the CGST Act, 2017 — modes of service of notices, orders and communications.
  • Section 146 of the CGST Act, 2017 — power to notify the Common Portal.
  • Section 115 of the Finance Act, 2022 — retrospective validation of the Common Portal notification.
  • Rule 142 of the CGST Rules, 2017 — electronic communication of orders.

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of in favour of the Assessee, applying the Luxmi Traders ratio, with the proceedings/appeal to be restored and decided in accordance with that framework.

Case Details

High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh; CWP-27229-2025 (O&M); Coram: Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rohit Kapoor; Date of Decision: 27th July, 2026.

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.