Reopening on mere change of opinion fails where reassessment relies on material already considered in the original assessment.

Reopening under section 147(b) was held invalid where the reassessment relied on material already on record at the original assessment. The assessment file showed that the Income-tax Officer had already examined the facts relating to installation of the freezing plant, the alleged purchase agreement, and the assessee's development rebate claim. A later reassessment based on the same material, after a fresh appreciation of its significance, amounted only to a change of opinion. That was insufficient to found jurisdiction under section 147(b), so the reassessment was annulled in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the reopening of the assessment under section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, followed by notice under section 148, was valid when the material relied upon was already on record at the time of the original assessment.

Analysis: The assessment records showed that the Income-tax Officer had already called for and considered the relevant facts concerning the date of installation of the freezing plant, the alleged agreement for purchase, and the assessee's claim for development rebate. The later reassessment was founded on the same material and on a subsequent realisation of its implications. A detail already available in the file does not become fresh information merely because it is later adverted to again. Reopening on such a mere reappraisal of the same material would amount to a change of opinion, which is not enough to sustain jurisdiction under section 147(b).

Conclusion: The reopening of the assessment was invalid and the annulment of the reassessment was upheld in favour of the assessee.

---