Reassessment beyond four years fails without non-disclosure; reopening on the same material is a mere change of opinion.

Reassessment initiated after four years from the end of the assessment year requires a recorded failure by the assessee to fully and truly disclose all material facts; absent that jurisdictional , reopening cannot stand. Here, the recorded reasons relied only on the assessee's own financial statements and the treatment of shareholders' accounts, without alleging non-disclosure or citing new tangible material. As the same issue had already been examined in the original assessment on a detailed explanation from the assessee, the reopening was treated as a mere change of opinion and stated to be invalid, with the notice and consequential reassessment liable to be quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the notice reopening assessment beyond four years was valid in the absence of any recorded failure by the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts, and whether the reopening was impermissible as a mere change of opinion.

Analysis: The reassessment was sought after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, so the statutory precondition of a failure by the assessee to make full and true disclosure of all material facts became essential to jurisdiction. The reasons recorded for reopening referred only to the assessee's own financial statements and the treatment of shareholders' account, without any allegation of non-disclosure or any new tangible material. The same aspect had already been examined during the original assessment proceedings, where the assessee had furnished a detailed explanation on the tax treatment of shareholders' and policyholders' accounts. Reopening on the same material therefore amounted to a change of opinion.

Conclusion: The reopening was invalid and the notice as well as the consequential reassessment order were liable to be quashed. The decision is in favour of the assessee.

---