Prior final classification of goods bars contrary reassessment where facts and law remain unchanged under tax consistency principles.

In tax assessment, res judicata does not strictly apply across different years, but an earlier final appellate determination ordinarily binds authorities on precedent and consistency where the facts and legal position remain unchanged. Because the goods at issue had already been finally classified as components of electronic goods and taxable under that head, the assessing authority could not take a contrary view to reopen the assessment under section 21(2) of the Trade Tax Act. The permission for reassessment and the consequential notice were therefore held illegal and liable to be quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessing authority could reopen the assessment and grant permission for reassessment under section 21(2) of the Trade Tax Act on a contrary view of the same goods, notwithstanding a prior final appellate order between the parties classifying the goods in a particular tax head.

Analysis: In tax matters, res judicata does not strictly apply across different assessment years, but where the facts and legal position remain the same, an earlier final decision on the issue ordinarily binds the authorities on the principle of precedent and consistency. The prior appellate order between the parties had finally determined that the goods manufactured and sold by the petitioner were components of electronic goods and were assessable under the head of electronic goods. In such circumstances, the assessing authority could not take a contrary view and initiate reassessment on the same issue.

Conclusion: The permission for reassessment and the consequential notice were illegal and liable to be quashed. The issue is decided in favour of the assessee.

---