Allowing the petition the Court held  that the information as contained in the annexure to the notice and the order passed in exercise of powers under section 148A(d) of the Act made it clear that the entire basis for reopening the assessment was nothing but the material and information collected during search conducted in the premises of another assessee. Collection of details relating to search would not mean collection of new incriminating material and information, independent of the incriminating material and information collected during search proceedings. The earlier notice, dated March 31, 2021, issued under section 148 merely stated that the Assessing Officer had reasons to believe that the income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 2016-17 had escaped assessment under section 147. The later notice, dated June 2, 2022, issued under section 148A(b) pursuant to the decision in UOI  v. Ashish Agarwal (2022) 444 ITR 1 (SC), it was stated that there was information pertaining to the assessee which suggested that income chargeable to tax for the assessment year 2016-17 had escaped assessment under section 147. The notice clearly showed that incriminating material and information was found during the search proceedings and not beyond that and to assume jurisdiction under section 148A such information was made a basis to draw inferences which were described as pre search and post search investigations. It had been assumed that the incriminating material and information collected during search followed by collection of details which were intrinsically related to such material and information would confer jurisdiction under section 147.  That the Department had the authority to reopen the assessment by invoking the powers under section 153C and draw reassessment proceedings under section 153A. That was not done within the period of limitation prescribed under section 153B. The Department was fully aware of the fact that proceedings under section 153C would be barred by limitation, and therefore, recourse was taken to the provisions under section 148 and section 148A which had no application in the assessee’s case. The orders passed for the assessment years 2016-17 and 2017-18 were unsustainable and accordingly, quashed and set aside.   (AY.2016-17, 2017-18)