Allowing the petition the Court held that there is no tangible material coming into existence after conclusion of regular assessment proceedings and before recording of the reasons on the issues stated in the reasons recorded for reopening the case. The reasons itself suggest that there is no new tangible material post the assessment proceedings and reassessment is stated to be made on the material already on record and considered at the time of passing the original assessment order under s. 143(3). In fact, by its letter dt. 7th Aug., 2017, assessee had placed on record during the regular assessment proceedings a statement giving details of the long-term capital loss incurred on the redemption of preference shares of GI Ltd. during the year ended 31st March, 2015 and the factum of GI Ltd. being a wholly owned subsidiary. The fact that GI Ltd. was wholly own subsidiary was expressly stated in the balance sheet filed by assessee and also in the letter dt. 19th Sept., 2017 addressed by the AO. Therefore, it cannot be stated that any new fact or material has come to light to alter this position

Court also observed in this case, one set of reasons was provided to assessee and when objected to by assessee, respondents justify the reopening by producing an undated and unsigned reasons which was never furnished to the assessee at any point of time prior thereto. Reassessment notice was quashed. Followed Aroni Commercials Ltd v. Dy.CIT  (2014) 362 ITR 403 / 224 Taxman 13 / 44 taxmann.com 304 (Bom)(HC) (AY. 2015-16)