Change of opinion cannot justify reassessment where the original assessment already considered the relevant goods and facts.

Goods made of jute, including coir matting and related items, were treated as a factual classification issue, and the Tribunal's finding that they fell within jute goods was left undisturbed because no adequate factual basis was shown to reclassify them as unclassified goods. Reassessment under section 21 was held unsustainable where the original assessment had already examined the goods and applied its mind, since proceedings could not be initiated on a mere change of opinion. The revision was found to have no merit and the Tribunal's order in favour of the assessee was upheld.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether goods made of jute, including coir matting and related items, were liable to be treated as unclassified goods for sales tax purposes. (ii) Whether reassessment proceedings under section 21 could be initiated on a mere change of opinion.

Issue (i): Whether goods made of jute, including coir matting and related items, were liable to be treated as unclassified goods for sales tax purposes.

Analysis: The Tribunal recorded a finding of fact that the disputed goods were made of jute. The Court held that the classification of such goods depended on factual inquiry, and no such factual foundation had been laid to upset the Tribunal's conclusion. The attempt to rely on the dictionary meaning of "coir" and on the statutory definition of "jute" under the Central Sales Tax Act did not dislodge the Tribunal's factual finding. The question could not be raised for the first time in revision.

Conclusion: The goods were not shown to be outside the class of jute goods, and the finding treating them as jute goods stood in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether reassessment proceedings under section 21 could be initiated on a mere change of opinion.

Analysis: The original assessment records showed that the sales tax had examined form No. 31 and had applied his mind to the description of the goods, including coir matting and jute goods. The Tribunal's finding that the reassessment was founded only on a change of opinion was treated as a finding of fact. On that basis, the Court held that where the original assessment had already considered and accepted the item, reassessment under section 21 was not sustainable merely because a different view was later taken.

Conclusion: The reassessment proceedings were invalid as they were based only on a change of opinion.

Final Conclusion: The revision had no merit and the Tribunal's order allowing the assessee's appeal was upheld, leaving the reassessment unsustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: Reassessment cannot be initiated under section 21 on a mere change of opinion where the original assessment shows that the assessing authority had applied its mind to the relevant facts and classification.

---