Reassessment barred by full disclosure and mere change of opinion on the same material.

Reassessment under section 148 was invalid where the assessee had already disclosed the tenancy dispute, non-receipt of rent and other relevant property facts before the original assessment. On those facts, there was no failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts, so reopening could not be sustained under section 147(a). There was also no fresh external information or new material to support section 147(b); the notice rested only on a later officer's different appreciation of the same record, which amounted to a mere change of opinion. The reassessment notice was quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the reassessment notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for reopening the completed assessment was valid where the assessee had disclosed the relevant facts before the original assessment and the reopening was founded only on a different view of the same materials.

Analysis: The recorded reasons showed that the officer proceeded on the footing that property income had escaped assessment because rent was deemed assessable under section 23(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The materials before the Court indicated that the assessee had already informed the assessing officer, before completion of the original assessment, about the tenancy dispute, the non-receipt of rent, and the relevant facts concerning the property. On that basis, there was no omission or failure by the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts. Reopening could not, therefore, be justified under section 147(a). For section 147(b), there was no subsequent external information or fresh material; the notice was founded only on a later officer's different appreciation of the same facts, which amounted to a mere change of opinion. Such a change of opinion does not constitute valid information for reassessment.

Conclusion: The reassessment notice was invalid and was quashed; the assessee succeeded.

---