ORDER :

1. Both these Special Civil Applications seek to challenge the notices issued for re-opening of the assessment for the assessment years concerned under Section 148 and the orders passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

1.1 The petitions involve similar facts and identical issues, therefore, they were heard together to be treated for disposal by this common judgment and order.

1.2 In the facts and circumstances of the case, having regard to the issues involved and with consent and request of learned advocates for the parties, all these Special Civil Applications were taken up for final consideration today.

2. Rule returnable in each of the Special Civil Applications forthwith. Learned advocate Ms. Kalpana Raval waives service of Rule in respective petition.

2.1 Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.

3. In the present petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the respective petitioners have called in question the notice issued by respondent-assessing officer under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 seeking to reopen the assessment in respect of assessment year 2013-14 or assessment year 2014-15 as the case may be. Also challenged are the orders passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).

3.1 The details of date of notice, date of order under Section 148A(d) of the Act, assessment year, etc., in respect of all the petitioners are given in the table below:

3.2 While in the respective impugned orders under section 148A(d) of the Act mentioned are the factual details and the reasons on the basis of which the assessing officer has found that the cases are fit to be reopened for the assessment in respect of the year under consideration, it is inter alia stated that the notice under section 148 of the Act was originally issued for the assessment years 2013-14 or 2014-15, as the case may be. All the said notices were treated as show-cause notice under section 148A(b) of the Act in light of the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal, (2023) 1 SCC 617 : (2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC) and that thereupon, the order under section 148A(d) was passed.

4. At the outset, learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the notice issued under section 148 of the Act and the consequential order under section 148A(d) of the Act issued by the department for assessment years 2013-14 are barred on the ground of limitation, the notices having been issued after passage of six years from the end of the relevant assessment year.

4.1 It was submitted that in view of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Keenara Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. The Income Tax Officer being Special Civil Application No. 17321 of 2021 and allied petitions, decided on 07.02.2023, the question of legality of the notice issued in respect of Assessment Year 2013-14 and Assessment Year 2014-2015 is covered and the impugned notice is without jurisdiction as it is beyond the time limit prescribed.

5. In order to properly understand the controversy and the applicable provisions in particular, prior to coming into force of Finance Act, 2021 called old regime as well as the provisions introduced in the Finance Act, 2021 described as new regime, the development of the law emanating from Keenara Industries Pvt. Ltd. (supra) in that regard may be revisited with, by noticing the aspects considered and decided in the said decision:

5.1 Section 147 of the Act empowers the assessing officer to reassess the income of the as