Allowing the petition the Court held that the material that had been used for initiating the reassessment proceedings was the same material that was available to the Assessing Officer while passing the draft assessment orders. The failure to arrive at a logical conclusion in a section 144C proceeding could not become the basis for initiating the proceedings under section  148 of the Act in the absence of new material emerging before the Assessing Officer which gave the Assessing Officer reason to believe that the assessee’s income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. The notice of reassessment was not valid. Court also held that the Additional Commissioner while giving approval under section 148 of the Act, ought to have applied his mind to the crucial question as to whether any new or fresh facts had come to the notice of the Assessing Officer for invoking the provisions of section  148 of the Act. The Additional Commissioner, on the other hand, mechanically replicated the language of the provision by making the endorsement in both cases the  approval was not valid. (AY. 2013-14)