W.A. No.2176 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24.06.2025 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.K.R.SHRIRAM, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN W.A.No.2176 of 2021 and C.M.P.No.13751 of 2021 Indian Syntans Investments Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Director, Mr.N.Narayanan No.71, Third Main Road, Kasturba Nagar, Adyar, Chennai 600 020. .. Appellant -vs- The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle II (3), 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. .. Respondent Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order dated 28.04.2021 passed in W.P.No.14021 of 2014 on the file of this Court. For Appellant : Mr.R.Sivaraman For Respondent : Mr.B.Ramana Kumar Sr. Standing Counsel https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A. No.2176 of 2021 JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) We see no reason to interfere with the impugned order. It cannot be said that there is no tangible material and the learned Single Judge was correct in dismissing the writ petition and permitting re-assessment to proceed with. 2. Though it is correct that an Assessing Officer cannot reopen an assessment merely on the basis of change of opinion even within a period of four years and he has no power to review an assessment which has been concluded, but where he has tangible material to come to the conclusion that there is an escapement of income from assessment, the power to reopen can be exercised. At the stage when the Assessing Officer reopens an assessment, it is not necessary that the material before the Court should conclusively prove or establish that income has escaped assessment. The reason to believe at the stage of re-opening is all that is relevant. Page 2 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A. No.2176 of 2021 3. We find support for this view from the judgment of the Apex Court in Asst. CIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers P. Ltd.1, which has been referred to in a Division Bench judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax2. 4. Therefore, keeping open all rights and contentions of the assessee including the fact that there is no case for re-assessment, we direct the Assessing Officer to go ahead with the re-assessment proceedings. If the assessee wishes to make any further submissions, the assessee may file the same within thirty days from the date this order is uploaded. Before passing a final order, a personal hearing shall be given to the assessee, notice whereof shall be communicated at least five working days in advance. Any order or judicial pronouncements of any Court or Tribunal that the Assessing Officer is going to rely on, list thereof be made available to assessee along with the notice of personal hearing. The order to be passed shall be a reasoned order dealing with all issues. 1(2007) 291 ITR 500 (SC) 2(2013) 30 taxmann.com 211 (Bombay) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A. No.2176 of 2021 With the aforesaid directions/observations, the appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the interim application stands closed. (K.R.SHRIRAM, CJ.) (SUNDER MOHAN, J.) 24.06.2025 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No sra To The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle II (3), 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. Page 4 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A. No.2176 of 2021 The Hon'ble Chief Justice and Sunder Mohan, J. (sra) W.A. No.2176 of 2021 24.06.2025 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis