Allowing the appeal the Tribunal held that the  Assessing Officer had called for various details of cash deposits in the bank, cash sales and cash deposits, information regarding mis-match of total sales as per the value added tax return and sales shown and purchases figures appearing in the profit and loss account and audited balance-sheet. A detailed enquiry had been conducted by the Assessing Officer and complete details with necessary evidence and explanation had been filed by the assessee and thus, it remained uncontroverted that an independent enquiry was carried out by the Assessing Officer and after due consideration of facts and proper application of mind a permissible view had been taken for assessing the income of the assessee. No independent enquiry had been conducted by the Principal Commissioner on his own before setting aside the order of the Assessing Officer. There was no violation of provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act in the case of assessee as alleged by the Principal Commissioner, as there was no actual transaction of payment of cash for making purchases exceeding the limit as prescribed under section 40A(3) of the Act. Since there was no violation of the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act, no disallowance was called for in the hands of the assessee. Thus, the Principal Commissioner had erred in not considering the facts in the correct perceptive and in holding that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. (AY.2017-18)