Reassessment beyond four years requires full and true disclosure failure; later retrospective registration withdrawal cannot justify reopening.

Reopening of completed assessments beyond four years under Section 147 requires a jurisdictional failure by the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. Where exemption under Section 11 had been claimed while registration under Section 12A(a) was in force and had been accepted in the original assessment, a later retrospective withdrawal of registration does not by itself justify reopening. In the absence of any non-disclosure at the relevant time, notices under Section 148 are unsustainable and the reassessment proceedings cannot be validly initiated.

---

---

Issues: Whether notices issued for reopening assessments beyond four years were sustainable in the absence of any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment.

Analysis: The assessments were sought to be reopened under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 after expiry of four years from the relevant assessment years. For reopening beyond four years, the proviso to Section 147 requires a jurisdictional foundation that the assessee failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. At the time when the assessee claimed exemption under Section 11, registration under Section 12A(a) was in force and the exemption had been allowed in the original assessments. The reopening was based only on the later retrospective withdrawal of registration, not on any non-disclosure by the assessee at the relevant time.

Conclusion: The condition precedent for reopening beyond four years was not satisfied and the notices under Section 148 were unsustainable. The reassessment proceedings were quashed in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: Reassessment beyond four years cannot be initiated unless the assessee has failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment; a subsequent change in the legal position or retrospective cancellation of registration does not by itself confer jurisdiction to reopen.

---