Reassessment for change of opinion fails where reopening rests on material already examined and no new tangible evidence exists.

Reassessment under section 147 was invalid because it was based on material already examined in the original assessment and not on new tangible material showing escapement of income. The Tribunal noted that the acquisition date and capital gains treatment of the property transaction had already been considered, so the reopening amounted to a mere change of opinion. In the absence of any failure by the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts, the statutory conditions for invoking reassessment jurisdiction were not met. The reassessment notice and consequent assessment were therefore held unsustainable and were set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the reassessment initiated under section 148 was valid when it was founded on material already examined in the original assessment and there was no new tangible material to justify a belief that income had escaped assessment.

Analysis: The original assessment had already considered the acquisition date and the nature of the capital gains arising from the property transaction. The reopening was based on the same record and amounted to a review of an issue earlier examined, rather than a reassessment founded on new material. In the absence of failure by the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts, the statutory conditions for invoking reassessment jurisdiction were not satisfied. The principle that reassessment cannot rest on a mere change of opinion governed the matter.

Conclusion: The reassessment notice and the consequent assessment were held unsustainable and were set aside, in favour of the assessee.

Ratio Decidendi: Reassessment under section 147 cannot be invoked on a mere change of opinion on material already considered in the original assessment and requires tangible material giving rise to reason to believe that income has escaped assessment.

---