Common portal service under CGST Act validly communicates orders, limiting belated writ challenges and preserving statutory limitation rules.

Communication of CGST orders through the common portal is legally effective where the portal has been notified for statutory functions under Section 146 read with Section 169 of the CGST Act, 2017. On that basis, an order uploaded on the portal constituted valid service, and a challenge raised nearly three years later was not entertained in writ jurisdiction. The earlier Division Bench view on portal-based communication was followed, and the request to reserve liberty to pursue the statutory appellate remedy did not justify interference because any such remedy would remain subject to statutory limitation and other legal requirements.

---

---

Issues: Whether an order uploaded on the common portal under the CGST regime constituted valid communication so as to justify rejection of the challenge raised after a long delay, and whether any interference was warranted in writ jurisdiction.

Analysis: Section 169 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 permits service of an order, notice, decision or other communication by making it available on the common portal, and this provision must be read along with Section 146 of the same Act. Once the common portal is notified for statutory functions, communication of orders through that portal is legally effective. The issue had already been answered in an earlier Division Bench decision, and the Court found no reason to depart from that view. In that backdrop, the challenge raised nearly three years later could not succeed in writ jurisdiction. The request to reserve liberty to pursue the statutory appellate remedy was not treated as a basis for interference, as any such remedy would still remain subject to the statutory requirements, including limitation.

Conclusion: The portal-based communication was held to be valid, and the writ appeal was not entertained on the ground of delay or lack of merit.

---