Dismissing the appeal of the revenue the Tribunal held that in the original assessment order the taxability of freezer security deposits was considered and addition to the income was made by the AO. The AO had not mentioned or established that the reassessment was proposed due to failure on the part of the assessee to disclose truly and fully all material facts which is a pre-condition when the notice under S.  148 is issued beyond a period of four years. While completing the original assessment, the lapsed liability was taxed on a proportionate basis over four years from the date of receipt, whereas in the reassessment all the lapsed freezer deposits which were outstanding as on March 31, 2006 were taxed on the ground that the liability to repay had ceased. Thus, the reopening was on a change of opinion. Further the Tribunal in the assessee’s case for the earlier year held that the amount was taxable only in the year of termination and the assessee had already offered such amount to tax in the return filed by it. The order of the Tribunal had not been reversed by the High Court. Therefore, the freezer security deposit was taxable only on the year of termination of agreement between the assessee and the dealer/distributor. (AY.2009-10)