Reassessment cannot reopen a final classification on mere change of opinion without fresh objective material.

Reassessment under Section 24 of the DVAT Act could not be sustained where an earlier classification determination under Section 49 of the Delhi Sales Tax Act had attained finality and the reopening was unsupported by fresh or objective material. The court held that the assessing authority had merely revisited the concluded classification on a different view of the same material, which amounted to an impermissible review rather than a lawful reassessment. In the absence of new facts justifying reopening, the impugned reassessment was set aside in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether reassessment under Section 24 of the DVAT Act, 2004 could be upheld when the earlier classification decision under Section 49 of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 had attained finality and no fresh material justified reopening.

Analysis: The earlier classification decision had conclusively determined the tax treatment of the goods on the basis of the material then available, and the remand by the first appellate authority was confined to verification of statutory forms and declarations. The reassessment order disclosed no new factual basis or objective material to justify reopening under Section 24. In substance, the assessing authority revisited and altered the concluded classification only because it took a different view, which amounted to a review of the earlier decision rather than a lawful reassessment. Reopening under Section 24 was held to depend on some fresh material or objective basis and could not be exercised mechanically to disturb a completed assessment.

Conclusion: Reassessment under Section 24 was not sustainable in the absence of fresh material, and the impugned order was set aside in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: Reassessment cannot be used to review a concluded determination on a mere change of opinion; it requires fresh or objective material justifying reopening.

---