Held that the Assessing Officer conducted enquiry by issuing notice under section 142(1) of the Act asking questions pertaining to provision for construction expenses, the issue raised by the Principal Commissioner in his order under section 263 of the Act. In response to the notice under section 142(1) of the Act, the assessee submitted its reply in the assessment proceedings about the work-in-progress (construction expenses). The Assessing Officer examined the issue and took a possible view and completed the assessment. Therefore, such assessment order should not be considered as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. Besides, the Principal Commissioner had not set out why this item of provision for expenditure needed to be investigated and what type of inquiry ought to have conducted by the Assessing Officer. None of the reasons set out by the Principal Commissioner for invoking the jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act was sustainable.(AY.2017-18)