Change of opinion cannot justify reassessment, and mill board may fall within "paper" under a broad tax notification.

Reassessment under section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act cannot rest on a mere change of opinion where the original assessing authority had already considered the taxability of the commodity; on the stated facts, reopening was held invalid. The notification covering "paper of all kinds" was construed in common parlance and in light of notification history, and mill board, being used for printing, drawing, packing and similar purposes, was treated as falling within "paper" rather than as an unclassified item. Both issues were resolved against the Revenue, and the Tribunal's view was left undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether reassessment proceedings under section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act could be initiated on the facts of the case, or whether the action was barred as a mere change of opinion after the original assessment; (ii) Whether mill board fell within the notified expression "paper" under Notification No. ST-II-332/X-10121971 dated 15th November, 1971, or was an unclassified item.

Issue (i): Whether reassessment proceedings under section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act could be initiated on the facts of the case, or whether the action was barred as a mere change of opinion after the original assessment.

Analysis: Reassessment cannot be sustained on a mere change of opinion. The material on record showed that the same assessing authority had earlier considered the taxability of mill board and had treated it as paper in the relevant assessments. The later reopening was thus not founded on non-application of mind at the original stage, but on a subsequent change in view. The facts therefore did not justify reassessment under section 21.

Conclusion: The reassessment proceedings were invalid and the finding was in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether mill board fell within the notified expression "paper" under Notification No. ST-II-332/X-10121971 dated 15th November, 1971, or was an unclassified item.

Analysis: The expression "paper" had to be understood in common parlance and in the light of the legislative history of the notifications. Earlier notifications had used wider and narrower formulations, and the 1971 notification used the broad words "paper of all kinds including hand-made paper, whether meant for writing, printing, copying, packing or for any other purpose." The Tribunal's factual finding, based on samples and the manner of use, was that mill board was used for printing, drawing, packing, file covers and similar purposes. Support was also drawn from the treatment of mill board in the Central Excise Tariff and from earlier departmental treatment of the commodity as paper.

Conclusion: Mill board was covered by the expression "paper" in the notification and not taxable as an unclassified item, and the finding was in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: Both issues were decided against the Revenue, the revisions failed, and the Tribunal's decision was left undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Reassessment cannot be founded on a mere change of opinion, and a tariff entry using broad language such as "paper of all kinds" is to be construed in common parlance and in the context of the relevant notification history.

---