Audit objection alone cannot justify reassessment; reopening requires fresh material and independent application of mind.

Audit objections on a point of law do not constitute "information" sufficient to reopen assessment under Section 15 of the Himachal Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1968 read with Rule 61. Reassessment cannot rest solely on an audit party's opinion or on a statutory provision that was already part of the law but was allegedly overlooked at the original stage; reopening requires fresh, legally relevant material and independent application of mind by the assessing authority. The HC therefore held that the reassessment based only on the audit objection was not sustainable and the reassessment and consequential appellate orders were set aside in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether an audit objection, by itself, constitutes sufficient information to justify reopening of assessment under Section 15 of the Himachal Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1968 read with Rule 61.

Analysis: The reassessment was founded only on an audit objection, without any fresh material showing that the Assessing Authority had independently applied its mind to the facts and circumstances. A notification or legal provision that forms part of the statute or rules cannot be treated as new information merely because it was overlooked at the time of the original assessment. The principle applied was that an audit party's opinion on a point of law does not amount to information for reopening, and ignorance of the law cannot be treated as a basis for reassessment.

Conclusion: The reopening of assessment on the basis of the audit objection was not sustainable, and the reassessment order and consequential appellate orders were liable to be set aside in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: An audit objection on a point of law does not constitute "information" for reassessment, and reopening must rest on legally relevant material warranting independent application of mind by the assessing authority.

---