PCIT  revised assessment order passed by Assessing Officer on ground that incorrect allowance was made by Assessing Officer of employee stock option plan expenses under section 37(1) as ESOP expenses were capital in nature relating to discount on shares issued, and, thus, not allowable. Tribunal held that the  Assessee furnished all information as asked for by Assessing Officer in its reply and had explained in detail what ESOP scheme was, and how it was an expenditure for assessee, and also basis for calculating ESOP expenditure. Since entire issue had been duly inquired into during assessment proceedings, reply of assessee was duly considered by Assessing Officer and Assessing Officer had taken a plausible view on issue based on existing proposition of law with regard to claim of ESOP expenses, there was no error in order passed by Assessing Officer in allowing assessee’s claim of ESOP expenses and, thus, revision was not justified. Tribunal also held that there has to be a finding of error causing prejudice to revenue by Pr. Commissioner for valid exercise of revisionary power under section 263 and as verification precedes finding of error, any direction for verification of claim under section 263 is not in consonance with requirement of law. (AY. 2018-19)