The main legal point established in the judgment is that notices for reassessment under Section 148 must be issued in accordance with the new Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, and where the original assessment was made under Section 143(3), the notice under Section 148 would be illegal if issued more than four years after the end of the relevant assessment year. Additionally, the proposed reassessment should not be in consequence of a mere change of opinion by the income-tax authorities.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition has been filed for a writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned notice dated november 20, 1998 (annexure 4 to the writ petition), issued under Section 148 of the Income-tax act, 1961. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged. We have heard Sri V. B. Upadh-yay, learned senior advocate, and Sri Yashwant Verma, learned counsel, for the petitioner, as well as learned departmental counsel for the respondents.

( 2 ) THIS writ petition being Writ Petition No. 181 of 1999, relates to the assessment year 1988-89, whereas connected Writ Petition No. 182 of 1999, relates to the assessment year 1989-90 and writ Petition No. 183 of 1999, relates to the assessment year 1990-91. Since the petitions are similar in nature they are being disposed of by a common judgment.

( 3 ) THE petitioner is a foreign company incorporated in France. It is engaged in the business of oil exploration and providing expertise and assistance in the said field throughout the world.

( 4 ) DURING the relevant assessment year, the petitioner-company was operating under three contracts with the Oil and Natural Gas Commission. These contracts were for drilling operation by employing its own "ida" rig and also for manning and management services for supervision of drilling activities carried on by the ONGC on its rigs, Sagar Vijay and Sagar Bhu- shan. The petitioner-company supplied its own technical personnel and expertise in manning such contracts.

( 5 ) IN the assessment year 1988-89, the IDA rig was sold to Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. and the operations for the IDA were for part of the year, whereas operations on the other rigs owned by the ONGC continued up to the assessment year 1991-92.

( 6 ) THE petitioner being a foreign company incorporated in France its taxability in respect of income accrued or deemed to accrue in India is governed by the double taxation avoidance agreement. A copy of the said treaty is annexure 1 to the writ petition. The petitioner being a non-resident was taxable in India only in respect of income accrued or deemed to accrue in india. Accordingly, the petitioner filed the returns of its income in the relevant assessment years disclosing its income by way of proceeds from manning and management contracts as fee for technical services as per the provisions of article XVI of the treaty. This was supported by an order under Section 195 (2) issued by the Income-tax Department on August 25, 1987, directing the ONGC to apply a tax rate of 30 per cent, on the income from the said contracts. A true copy of the order dated August 25, 1987, is annexed as annexure 2 to the petition. The income relating to the IDA rig not falling under the definition of technical services were returned as ordinary business income. However, the Assessing Officer while making the assessment under Section 143 (3) of the Act took the view that the proceeds from manning and management contracts with the ONGC were taxable as business income in terms of Section 44bb of the Act. This was the changed view of the Department in the light of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Scan drilling as also the opinion of the Attorney- General of India. It is also asserted that the view taken by the Tribunal and the Attorney-General was accepted by the CBDT vide Boards instructions dated November 22, 1990. A true copy of the assessment order dated February 26, 1991, for the assessment year 1988-89 is enclosed as annexure 3 to the petition. The assessments for the assessment years 1989-90 and 1990-91 were made on February 27, 1991.

( 7 ) IT is alleged in paragraph of the petition that the Department had in the meantime issued instructions to the ONGC to stop all payments to the petitioner till a no objection certificate is issued. This was allegedly done to pressurise the petitioner to settle the dispute regarding the assessment year 1988-89. Accordingly to buy peace and avoid protracted litigation, the petitioner had no option but