Reasonable belief for estate duty reopening requires supporting material; a mechanical notice without reasons is invalid.

Reopening under section 59 of the Estate Duty Act requires relevant material capable of generating a reasonable belief that estate duty has escaped assessment or been under-assessed. A notice issued in prescribed form, without recorded reasons, any allegation of non-disclosure of material facts, or supporting material showing the requisite belief, is mechanical and fails the statutory precondition. On the facts discussed, the counter-affidavit also did not cure the defect, so the reassessment initiation could not be sustained and the notice was quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether notice issued for reopening assessment under section 59 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 was supported by relevant material and a reasonable belief that estate duty had escaped assessment or been under-assessed.

Analysis: The notice was issued in the prescribed pro forma and did not disclose reasons. The record disclosed no allegation of failure to disclose facts or suppression of material facts, and no material showing that the authority had received information giving rise to the belief required for reopening. The counter-affidavit also failed to supply any valid basis for the notice. On these facts, the initiation of reassessment proceedings was found to be mechanical and unsupported by the statutory precondition of a reasonable belief.

Conclusion: The notice under section 59 was invalid and was quashed.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded, and the reassessment notice could not be sustained in law.

Ratio Decidendi: Reopening under the estate duty law requires relevant material capable of generating a reasonable belief of escapement or under-assessment, and a notice issued mechanically without such material is invalid.

---