TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (11) TMI 531
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....elhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 at the first point of sale; and that the reassessments made by the Sales Tax Officer may be quashed and set aside. 2.. The respondents are not pressing the circular dated November 12, 2002 and therefore, the court is not required to examine the legality or the validity of the said circular. In the present case, the court is required to examine the validity of the reassessment orders made by the assessing officer, copies of which are at pages 46 to 49 of the writ petition, for the assessment years 2001-02 and 2000-01 dated August 7, 2003 and August 8, 2003, respectively. Earlier assessment orders are placed on record at pages 37 to 40 of the writ Oral. petition in respect of assessment years 2000-01 and 2001-02 da....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... In the reassessment order for the year 2001-02, at page 46 of the paper book, there is a reference to the notification as under: "The case has been reopened in view of notification effective from November 28, 2000 regarding tea being tax-paid item as not included in kirana item." Similar is the position with regard to the other assessment year as well. It is in this background that the learned counsel for the petitioner has questioned the legality and validity of the reassessment orders. 6.. Our attention was drawn to various decisions of this Court as well as the apex Court. In Jindal Photo Films Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax [1998] 234 ITR 170 a division Bench of this Court pointed out as under: "The power to reop....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... In such situations, it is not a case of mere change of opinion or the drawing of a different inference from the same facts as were earlier available but acting on fresh information. Since the belief is that of the Income-tax Officer, the sufficiency of reasons for forming the belief is not for the court to judge but it is open to an assessee to establish that there in fact existed no belief or that the belief was not at all a bona fide one or was based on vague, irrelevant and non-specific information. To that limited extent, the court may look into the conclusion arrived at by the Income-tax Officer and examine whether there was any material available on the record from which the requisite belief could be formed by the Income-tax Officer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re is no change of law. No new material has come on record. No information has been received. It is merely a fresh application of mind by the same assessing officer to the same set of facts. While passing the original orders of assessment the order dated February 28, 1994, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was before the assessing officer. That order stands till today. What the assessing officer has said about the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) while recording reasons under section 147 he could have said even in the original orders of assessment. Thus, it is a case of mere change of opinion which does not provide jurisdiction to the assessing officer to initiate proceedings under section 147 of the Act." ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aid judgment the apex Court held as under: "The duty of the assessee in any case does not extend beyond making a true and full disclosure of primary facts. Once he has done that his duty ends. It is for the Income-tax Officer to draw the correct inference from the primary facts. It is no responsibility of the assessee to advise the Income-tax Officer with regard to the inference which he should draw from the primary facts. If an Income-tax Officer draws an inference which appears subsequently to be erroneous, mere change of opinion with regard to that inference would not justify initiation of action for reopening assessments: See Incometax Officer v. Lakhmani Mewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC)." 8.. The case of Jindal Photo Films Ltd. ....