Fresh tangible material is essential for valid reassessment; reopening based only on record review is without jurisdiction.

Reassessment is invalid where the Assessing Officer relies only on a re-examination of the original assessment record and not on fresh tangible material that came to light after completion of the assessment. The statutory trigger for reopening is objective new material giving rise to a rational belief that income has escaped assessment; without it, the assumption of jurisdiction fails. In such circumstances, reopening amounts to an impermissible review and the question of mere change of opinion does not arise. The reassessment was therefore quashed as bad in law for want of fresh tangible material.

---

---

Issues: Whether reassessment could validly be initiated in the absence of fresh tangible material in the possession of the Assessing Officer.

Analysis: The reopening was founded only on a re-examination of the original assessment record and not on any new material that had come to light after the completed assessment. The legal requirement for reopening is the existence of fresh tangible material that forms the basis of a rational belief that income has escaped assessment. In the absence of such objective trigger, the assumption of jurisdiction under reassessment provisions is invalid, and the question of change of opinion does not arise.

Conclusion: The reassessment was invalid and bad in law for want of fresh tangible material, and the quashing of the reassessment was justified in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: Reassessment cannot be sustained unless it is founded on fresh tangible material that came to the Assessing Officer after the original assessment; absent such material, the reopening is an impermissible exercise of review and is without jurisdiction.

---