https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329191 The court quashed the notice re-opening the assessment order for the assessment year 2011-2012, as it found the reasons provided by the Assessing Officer to be a mere change of opinion. The court held that the exclusion of CENVAT and VAT amounts from the valuation of stocks, which led to alleged undervaluation, had already been explained during the original assessment process. Additionally, the court determined that the non-inclusion of CENVAT and VAT in stock valuation did not impact tax liability, leading to the decision to allow the petition and reject the reassessment. en-us Tue, 14 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Jun 2016 14:58:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329191 The court quashed the notice re-opening the assessment order for the assessment year 2011-2012, as it found the reasons provided by the Assessing Officer to be a mere change of opinion. The court held that the exclusion of CENVAT and VAT amounts from the valuation of stocks, which led to alleged undervaluation, had already been explained during the original assessment process. Additionally, the court determined that the non-inclusion of CENVAT and VAT in stock valuation did not impact tax liability, leading to the decision to allow the petition and reject the reassessment. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 14 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329191