Dismissed¶17

M/S Aman Enterprises v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC16 Jul 2026CWP/12343/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

M/s Aman Enterprises v State of Haryana and others, CWP-12343-2026 (O&M), High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, decided 16.07.2026 — challenge to tax recovery notice dated 08.10.2025 for assessment year 2004-2005 alleging non-service of Order-in-Original passed pursuant to Haryana Tax Tribunal remand order dated 02.04.2012; final order dated 31.03.2014 (Annexure P-5) served 17.11.2025; court holds order referring to earlier-dated orders remains a valid Order-in-Original and not merely an order-sheet; writ petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

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, it cannot be said that the same is not an Order-in-Original and is merely an order-sheet. ¶15

M/S Aman Enterprises Vs State of Haryana and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

122 I N THE HIGH COURT OF PU N JAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDI G ARH

¶3

CWP- 1 2343-2026 (O&M) Date o f Decision: 16.07.2026

¶4

M/s Aman E n terprises …Petitioner

¶5

Vs.

¶6

State of Hary a na and others …Respondents

¶7

CORAM: HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR

¶8

Present: M r. Avneet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. (through video conferenci n g)

¶9

M r. Sourabh Goel, Addl. AG, H a ryana. ***

¶10

ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. (Oral)

¶11

T his petition has been filed ch a llenging the recovery notice d ated 08.10.2025 ( A nnexure P/4), in respect of a ssessment year 2004-2005, on the ground that t h e Order-in-Original pursuant to remand has never been served u pon the petitioner .

¶12

P erusal of the records would i n dicate that though initial ord e r of assessment w as passed, but in an appeal preferred before the Haryana Tax Tribunal, th e Appellate Authority remitted back the matter to the asse s sing authority vid e order dated 02.04.2012 (Ann e xure P-2). Thereafter, the asse s sing authority has fixed different dates and fin a l order was passed on 31.03. 2 014 (Annexure P-5), which is appended at page 4 2 of the paperbook. 3. T his order apparently has be e n served upon the petitione r on 17.11.2025. M erely because the Order-in-Original passed pursuant to the re m and dated 31.03.2014 contains a reference to the o rders passed on the previous d a tes,