Reassessment for under-assessed tax upheld where invalid D forms led to concessional tax and change of opinion did not bar reopening.

Rule 14-A(9) was treated as a machinery provision permitting reassessment whenever tax had been assessed at too low a rate for any reason, after notice and enquiry. On the facts, concessional tax had been allowed on the basis of invalid D forms because the buyers were not governmental institutions, so the earlier assessments resulted in tax at a lower rate. The Court held that the provision was not confined by a rigid change-of-opinion limitation and distinguished authorities construing narrower reopening language. Reassessment was therefore upheld and the objection based on change of opinion failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether reassessment could validly be made under rule 14-A(9) when the original assessment had allowed concessional tax on the basis of invalid D forms, and whether a plea of change of opinion barred reopening.

Analysis: Rule 14-A(9) permits revision where tax has been assessed at too low a rate for any reason, after notice and enquiry. The provision was treated as a machinery provision intended to secure collection of the correct tax, and not as a provision confined by a rigid change-of-opinion limitation. Once the factual position was found that the buyers were not governmental institutions and the D forms were therefore invalid, the earlier assessments had resulted in tax at a lower rate. The Court distinguished authorities dealing with different statutory language, including provisions requiring "reason to believe" or otherwise imposing narrower limits on reopening.

Conclusion: Reassessment was valid and the plea of change of opinion failed.

Final Conclusion: The tax revision cases were dismissed, and the reassessments levying tax at the correct rate were upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the governing reassessment rule authorises revision whenever tax has been assessed at too low a rate for any reason, the assessing authority may reopen the assessment to levy the correct tax, and a mere change-of-opinion objection does not bar that power.

---