1. Since the relief sought for in all these Writ Petitions are identical and pertains to the same Group of Companies relating to the same product and common questions have been raised, these Writ Petitions were heard together and are disposed of by this common order.

2. W.P. No. 16166 of 2008 is taken as a lead case and the prayer sought for in W.P. Nos. 16166 to 16168 of 2008 are identical wherein the petitioner has sought for issuance of writ of declaration to declare the clarification issued by the first respondent in Clarification No.40/2003 dated 27.01.2003, as being prospective in application from the Assessment year 2003-04, and consequently declare that the Assessment Orders passed by the second respondent are illegal and unsustainable.

3. In W.P. Nos. 17322 & 17323 of 2010, the petitioners seek for identical relief as in the other three writ petitions to declare the clarification No.40 of 2003 dated 27.01.2003, as being prospective in application from the Assessment Order 2003-04, and to quash the consequential order of rejection of the application for waiver as unjust, illegal and void ab initio, and refund the excess differential tax collected from the petitioners