` 122 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA M/s Aman Enterprises State of Haryana and others CORAM: HON’BLE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr. M ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. 1. This petition has been filed challenging the recovery notice dated 08.10.2025 (Annexure P/4), in respect ground that the Order the petitioner. 2. Perusal of the records would indicate that though initial order of assessment was passed Tribunal, the Appellate Authority remitted back the matter to the assessing authority vide order dated 02.04.2012 authority has fixed different dates and final order was passed on 31.03.2014 (Annexure P-5) 3. This order apparently has been served upon 17.11.2025. Merely because the Order dated 31.03.2014 contains a reference to the orders passed on the previous dates, IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-12343 Date of Decision: M/s Aman Enterprises Vs. State of Haryana and others HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR Mr. Avneet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. (through video conferencing) Mr. Sourabh Goel, Addl. AG, Haryana. *** ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. (Oral) This petition has been filed challenging the recovery notice dated 08.10.2025 (Annexure P/4), in respect of assessment ye ground that the Order-in-Original pursuant to remand has never been serve the petitioner. Perusal of the records would indicate that though initial order of assessment was passed, but in an appeal preferred before the Haryana Tax Tribunal, the Appellate Authority remitted back the matter to the assessing ide order dated 02.04.2012 (Annexure P authority has fixed different dates and final order was passed on 31.03.2014 5), which is appended at page 42 of the paperbook. This order apparently has been served upon Merely because the Order-in-Original passed pursuant to the remand dated 31.03.2014 contains a reference to the orders passed on the previous dates, IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 12343-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 16.07.2026 …Petitioner …Respondents THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR , Advocate for the petitioner. (through video conferencing) r. Sourabh Goel, Addl. AG, Haryana. (Oral) This petition has been filed challenging the recovery notice dated f assessment year 2004-2005, on the Original pursuant to remand has never been served upon Perusal of the records would indicate that though initial order of but in an appeal preferred before the Haryana Tax Tribunal, the Appellate Authority remitted back the matter to the assessing (Annexure P-2). Thereafter, the assessing authority has fixed different dates and final order was passed on 31.03.2014 , which is appended at page 42 of the paperbook. This order apparently has been served upon the petitioner on Original passed pursuant to the remand dated 31.03.2014 contains a reference to the orders passed on the previous dates, This petition has been filed challenging the recovery notice dated , on the d upon Perusal of the records would indicate that though initial order of but in an appeal preferred before the Haryana Tax Tribunal, the Appellate Authority remitted back the matter to the assessing . Thereafter, the assessing authority has fixed different dates and final order was passed on 31.03.2014 the petitioner on Original passed pursuant to the remand dated 31.03.2014 contains a reference to the orders passed on the previous dates, RAJESH KUMAR 2026.07.20 12:47 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-12343-2026 (O&M) [2] it cannot be said that the same is not an Order-in-Original and is merely an order- sheet. 4. Finding no merit in the writ petition, the same is accordingly dismissed. 5. All pending misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (ROHIT KAPOOR) JUDGE 16.07.2026 rajesh 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? : Yes/No RAJESH KUMAR 2026.07.20 12:47 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.