The reassessment was initiated solely on the basis of a different legal inference drawn from the same material examined during the original scrutiny assessment. The Tribunal held that there was no fresh tangible material and the reopening amounted to a mere change of opinion, which is impermissible in law. It further held that royalty paid by the assessee to a duly authorised power of attorney holder for use of land was a genuine business expenditure incurred out of commercial expediency and allowable under section 37(1). (AY. 2012-13)