Held that  the assessee submitted the details of sale and purchase of shares and securities transactions along with proof of transaction ledger and dematerialised trading account. It was thus abundantly clear that the discrepancy as per show-cause notice issued by the Principal Commissioner was reconciled by the assessee by bringing on record the documentary evidence filed before the Assessing Officer. The Principal Commissioner denied giving credence to them on the flimsy ground that these were not found available on the assessment record. For non-availability of the documentary evidence filed by the assessee in assessment record, the assessee could not be faulted and it would be against the principles of natural justice to draw adverse inference therefor. That the direction of the Principal Commissioner to the Assessing Officer to reconcile the information on purchase of mutual fund units and to examine the sources of investment therein was beyond reason since it was not an issue selected for scrutiny. The details of purchase and sale of mutual fund units were furnished in the assessee’s reply to the notice under section 142(1) of the Act issued by the Assessing Officer. Enquiry as to the source of investment in mutual fund units was neither envisaged nor called for. Revision order is quashed.  (AY.2017-18)