Held that the very purpose for which the case was taken up for scrutiny assessment was to verify the purchase and sale of shares. In the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer had called for information. In response, the assessee had submitted various details. The Assessing Officer verified the transactions and recorded categorical findings that the assessment was completed after examining the information furnished with reference to the income declared under the head short-term capital gains. It was not the case of the Commissioner that the Assessing Officer had not verified the issue at all. The Commissioner cannot assume his jurisdiction and set aside the assessment order. The case at hand was not a case of lack of enquiry but inadequate enquiry. Held that since, the Tribunal had recalled its order in the earlier appeal filed before it against the order of the Commissioner under section 263 of the Act, the second appeal against the same order became infructuous and dismissed. (AY.2010-11)