Allowing the appeal, that the Assessing Officer had called for the details of receipt of share premium as well as the report of valuation of shares from the chartered accountant and the assessee had responded to the query submitting all the requisite information called for by the Assessing Officer. The order sheet entry and the notices issued under section 143(2) revealed that the Assessing Officer had enquired into the issue sought to be revised by the Principal Commissioner. The very fact that the Assessing Officer had called for report of valuation of shares given by the chartered accountant showed that the Assessing Officer had enquired and had gone into issue of applicability of the provisions of section 56(2)(viib) of the Act. Therefore, it could not be said that there was total lack of enquiry on the part of the Assessing Officer. The Principal Commissioner could not come to the conclusion that the report of valuation of shares was unacceptable in the absence of a report from another expert. The material on record did not suggest any error in the methodology adopted in the report. There was no material on record to show that there was an error in the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. In these circumstances, the Principal Commissioner was not justified in exercising the power of revision in respect of issue of receipt of share premium. (AY.2013-14)