could not have had any reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. In fact, this to our mind is a case of change of opinion, in as much as for the A.Y. 2006-07, the Assessing Officer in scrutiny proceedings accepted that the transaction qua the respondent is taxable in A.Y. 2006-07 and now seeks to tax it in A.Y. 2007-08. In any event, as held by the Tribunal there could be no reason to hold that the income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment in the present facts. The trigger for issuing the reopening notice appears to have been the limit to exemption available under Section 54EC of the Act coming into force with effect from Assessment Year 2007-08 onwards. This is evident not only from reasons recorded for issue of Notice u/s 148 of the Act as referred to herein above, but as also recorded by the Tribunal that the report received from the Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Surat essentially seeks to deny the exemption under Section 54EC of the Act in view of the amendment thereto. When the capital gains has been offered to tax in earlier assessment year and accepted by the Revenue in scrutiny proceedings, then a mere change in law in the subject assessment year with regard to extent of exemption will not give any reason to believe that income
