Held that  The Principal Commissioner had given sufficient and adequate opportunities before passing his revisional assessment order. The assessee failed to provide without details of development expenses, unsecured loan and the advances despite repeated notices and reminders. In the absence of any details sought by the Principal Commissioner, the order of the Assessing Officer was revised by the Principal Commissioner. The representative had not appeared before the Tribunal despite service of notice nor filed any written submission. Therefore, in the absence of any detailed requirement in support of the various grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, the finding of the Principal Commissioner was to be confirmed. (AY. 2013-14)