Revised assessment cannot survive after revisional findings negate tax evasion and unsettle the basis of enforcement allegations.

Revised assessment based on alleged transport of goods with bogus records could not survive once parallel revisional proceedings held that the documents were genuine, the parties were registered dealers, local tax had been charged, and there was no tax evasion. The revisional authority had already set aside the levy of compounding fee and advance tax, removing the factual foundation for the assessment revision. The Tribunal could not sustain the revised assessment merely on the earlier enforcement proposal after that revisional order attained finality. The Madras HC therefore set aside the revised assessment and the Tribunal's order, with consequential refund relief to the petitioner.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revised assessment and the Tribunal's order sustaining it could stand when the foundational allegation of evasion had already been found unsustainable in parallel revisional proceedings.

Analysis: The assessment proceedings were initiated on the basis of enforcement allegations that the goods were transported with bogus records and false documents. In the parallel revision, the Revisional Authority examined the records, found that the goods were supported by delivery challan-cum-invoice, that the seller and purchaser were registered dealers, that local tax had been charged in the invoice, and that there was no evasion of tax. Once the foundational allegation failed and the levy of compounding fee and advance tax was set aside, the Tribunal could not continue to sustain the revised assessment merely on the earlier enforcement proposal. The subsequent finality of the revisional order also removed the basis for the assessment revision.

Conclusion: The revised assessment and the Tribunal's order were unsustainable and were set aside, with consequential refund relief granted to the petitioner.

---