Reassessment on mere change of opinion fails when reopening relies on material already examined in the original assessment.

Reassessment under section 148 requires fresh material giving rise to a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment; where the original assessment had already examined creditor-related material and accepted the assessee's explanation, reopening on the same facts amounts to a mere change of opinion. Proceedings cannot be sustained when the later notice relies on the very material already considered and no new basis for reopening is shown. The note states that, on these facts, the reassessment notice was treated as invalid and the reopening proceedings were set aside for want of a legally sustainable foundation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the reassessment notice issued under section 148 was valid when it was based on the same material already considered in the original assessment and on proceedings earlier dropped under section 154.

Analysis: The original assessment had been completed after examination of the creditor-related material and the assessee's explanation had been accepted. The later notice was founded on the very same set of facts relating to the alleged unverifiable sundry creditors. There was no fresh material to justify reopening, and reopening on the same material amounted only to a change of opinion. In the absence of new material, reassessment cannot be initiated merely because the authority takes a different view on facts already on record.

Conclusion: The reassessment notice was invalid and was liable to be quashed.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded and the impugned reassessment proceedings were set aside for want of a legally sustainable basis for reopening.

Ratio Decidendi: Reassessment cannot be founded on a mere change of opinion in relation to material already considered in the original assessment; fresh material creating a reason to believe is necessary.

---