, B , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH B KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1069/KOL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2013-14 GOLDEN TRUST FINANCIAL SERVICES, 16, R.N. MUKHERJEE ROAD, KOLKATA- 700 001 [ PAN NO.AACFG 8395 A ] / V/S . PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,-12, AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA (7 TH FLOOR), 110, SHANTI PALLY, E.M. BYEPASS, KOLKATA-107 /APPELLANT .. /RESPONDENT /BY APPELLANT NONE /BY RESPONDENT SHRI RADHY SHYAM, CIT-DR /DATE OF HEARING 19-09-2019 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT -09-2019 /O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 ARISES AGAINST THE PRINICIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-12, KOLKATAS ORDER DATE D 27.03.2018 PASSED IN CASE NO.PR.CIT-12/KOL/TECH/263/2017-18/2411 INVOLVING PR OCEEDINGS U/S 263 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT. CASE CALLED TWICE. NONE APPEARS AT THE ASSESSEES B EHEST. WE ACCORDINGLY PROCEED EX PARTE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. 2. A PERUSAL OF THE INSTANT CASE FILE REVEALS THAT THE PCIT HAS PROCEEDED TO INVOKE HIS SEC. 263 REVISION JURISDICTION ON THE GROUND TH AT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD ITA NO.1069/KOL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 GOLDEN TRUST FINANCIAL SERVICES VS PC IT,CIR- 12, KOL. PAGE 2 COMPLETED THE REGULAR ASSESSMENT IN ISSUE ON AS 31. 03.2016 WITHOUT MAKING ADEQUATE INQUIRIES. HE OBSERVES IN PAGE 34 OF HIS REVISION O RDER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ACTED AS A COMMISSION AGENT DURING THE RELEVANT FINANCIAL YEAR 2012-13. ITS TOTAL REVENUE / GROSS RECEIPT IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT WAS READ 15 7.44 CRORES ALONGWITH OPERATIONAL EXPENSES AND SUNDRY CREDITORS AMOUNTS OF 125.83 CRORES AND 120.82 CRORES; RESPECTIVELY. THE ASSESSEE HAD FURTHER STATED THAT OUT OF ITS TOTAL SUNDRY CREDITORS BALANCE, 113.40 CRORES HAD BEEN DEBITED TO LAKHS OF AGENTS. THE PCIT FURTHER HOLDS THAT NEITHER THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NOR THE CORRESPON DING SCRUTINY RECORDS INDICATE THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO HAVE UNDERTAKEN ANY ENQUIRY AN D THEREFORE, ASSESSMENT ITSELF IS ERRONEOUS CAUSING PREJUDICE TO INTEREST OF THE REVE NUE. 3. AFTER GIVING OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE ASSESSEES PLEADINGS ITS DETAILED PAPER BOOK RUNNING INTO 209 PAGES FORMING PART OF RECORD THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE PCITS REVISION ORDER UNDER CHALLENGE , WE FIND THAT THE TAXPAYER HAS FAILED TO REBUT THE CLINCHING OBSERVATION OF NO PRO PER INQUIRY HAVING BEEN CONDUCTED AT THE ASSESSING OFFICERS BEHEST DURING SCRUTINY. WE THUS QUOTE HON'BLE APEX COURTS LANDMARK DECISION IN MALABAR INDUSTRIAL CO. LTD. VS. CIT (2000) 243 ITR 83 (SC) AND GEE.VIE. ENTERPRISE VS. ACIT (1975) 99 ITR 279 (DEL) TO HOLD THAT PCIT IS VERY WELL JUSTIFIED IN INVOKING HIS REVISION JURISDICTION IN FACTS OF THE INSTANT CASE SINCE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD NOT CARRIED OUT ANY FACTUAL V ERIFICATION OF THE JUSTIFYING VITAL ASPECTS. WE ACCORDINGLY AFFIRM THE PCITS ORDER UND ER CHALLENGE. 4. THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 25/09/2019 SD/- SD/- ( &) (( &) (J.SUDHAKAR REDDY) (S.S.GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *DKP-SR.PS ) - 25/09/2019 / KOLKATA ITA NO.1069/KOL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 GOLDEN TRUST FINANCIAL SERVICES VS PC IT,CIR- 12, KOL. PAGE 3 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /APPELLANT-GOLDEN TRUST FINANCIAL SERVICES, 16, R.N . MUKHERJEE ROAD, KOLKATA-7 00 001 2. /RESPONDENT-PCIT, CIRI-12, AAYAKAR BHAWAN POORVA 7 TH FL, 110, SHANTI PALLY E./M.BYEPASS, K OLAKTA-107 3. , - / CONCERNED CIT 4. - - / CIT (A) 5. . ((, , , /DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6. 2 / GUARD FILE. BY ORD ER/ , /TRUE COPY/ ,,