Court quashes assessment reopening, citing lack of new facts.

The court found that the initiation of the proceedings for reopening the assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was not sustainable in law. The notice under Section 148 and all subsequent proceedings were quashed as they were based on the same material facts already considered during the original assessment. The court relied on precedent to determine that reopening the assessment on the same grounds without new material facts amounted to a change of opinion, which was not permissible. The writ petition was allowed, and no costs were awarded.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Legality and validity of notice under Section 148 and initiation of proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for reopening the assessment for the assessment year 2009-10.
2. Whether the reopening of assessment is based on a mere change of opinion.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Legality and Validity of Notice under Section 148 and Initiation of Proceedings under Section 147
The petitioner challenged the notice under Section 148 and the initiation of proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for reopening the assessment for the assessment year 2009-10. The primary contention was that the notice was based on the same material documents already available to the assessing officer during the original scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3). During the scrutiny assessment, queries were raised regarding the claim under Section 35(2AB) and the purchase of unprocessed seeds. The petitioner had submitted audited details and supporting documents, which were considered and allowed by the assessing officer, despite no discussion in the assessment order.

Issue 2: Reopening of Assessment Based on Change of Opinion
The petitioner argued that the reopening of the assessment was merely a change of opinion. The petitioner cited the case of Marico Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, where it was held that if an assessing officer raises a query during the assessment proceedings and the assessee responds, the non-discussion of the issue in the assessment order implies acceptance of the assessee's submission. Therefore, reopening the assessment on the same grounds without new material facts is a change of opinion and is not permissible.

The court found that the issues on which the assessment was reopened were the same as those considered during the original scrutiny assessment. The assessing officer had already formed an opinion on these issues, and there was no new material fact that warranted reopening the assessment. The court referred to the judgment in Marico Ltd., upheld by the Supreme Court, which supported the petitioner's contention that reopening based on the same material facts is a change of opinion and not sustainable in law.

Conclusion
The court concluded that the initiation of the impugned proceeding for reopening the assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was not sustainable in law. The impugned notice under Section 148 dated 21st March 2014, and all subsequent proceedings based on this notice were quashed. The writ petition was disposed of by allowing the same, with no order as to costs.

---