The Rajasthan High Court has adopted the landmark ruling of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Luxmi Traders vs. Union Territory of Chandigarh (2026:PHHC099329:DB), holding that service of a show cause notice merely by uploading it on the Common Portal — without acknowledgment or reply by the assessee — cannot be deemed sufficient service. Justices Arun Monga and Ashutosh Kumar, in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12260/2026 (M/s Shree Mangal Proteins Limited vs. Superintendent CGST, decided 18.08.2026), set aside the appellate order rejecting the appeal on limitation and condoned the delay in filing.
The petitioner contended that neither the show cause notices dated 29.05.2024 and 03.08.2024, nor the Order-in-Original dated 22.08.2024, were effectively served — they were merely uploaded on the GST portal. The petitioner had no knowledge of these proceedings and could not file a timely appeal. The appellate authority dismissed the appeal as time-barred. The Court noted that the Order-in-Original was passed pursuant to the second SCN dated 03.08.2024 — giving the petitioner less than the prescribed period to even respond.
The Court quoted extensively from the Punjab and Haryana High Court's elaborate five-point framework in Luxmi Traders: (i) service by mere portal upload is not deemed sufficient unless acknowledged or replied to; (ii) where ex parte orders follow portal-only service, proceedings are restored to the SCN stage; (iii) where contested orders are served only via portal, limitation for appeal is not triggered; (iv) where appeals against portal-served orders are dismissed on limitation, such appellate orders are set aside; and (v) where both SCN and ex parte order were portal-served and appeal is dismissed on delay, both are set aside. The Court expressed "respectful agreement" with this view and condoned the delay, directing the appellate authority to hear the appeal on merits.
• 2026-juristway.com-1252-HC(Rajasthan)-GST | High Court of Rajasthan | D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12260/2026 | 18.08.2026