Reason to believe for reassessment must exist on original material; later evidence cannot justify reopening after the fact.

Reopening of assessment under section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 must rest on information available to the assessing authority when the reassessment is initiated; later material cannot retrospectively supply the required reason to believe. On the original information from the District Supply Officer, no reasonable basis was shown to believe that turnover had escaped assessment or that unrecorded coal purchases supported extra production, so the reassessment lacked a valid foundation. The Tribunal erred in relying on evidence produced for the first time much later, because that material was not before the authorities when reopening was commenced. The finding therefore favoured the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether reassessment under section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 could be sustained on the basis of the information originally received, and whether later evidence produced for the first time before the Tribunal could be used to justify the formation of reason to believe.

Analysis: The jurisdiction to reopen assessment depended on the information available to the assessing authority at the relevant time. On the material originally received from the District Supply Officer, without supplementation by later evidence, no reasonable basis was shown for believing that turnover had escaped assessment or that the assessee had purchased unrecorded coal for extra production. The Tribunal erred in relying on evidence that was not before the authorities when the reopening was initiated and which was produced for the first time much later.

Conclusion: The reassessment was not validly founded on the original information, and the reliance on subsequent evidence was impermissible; the finding went in favour of the assessee.

---