The ITAT held that  during the course of assessment proceedings the assessee had furnished the detailed explanations for the transactions recorded in the seized materials, that the AO has considered the entries noted in the seized materials and on that basis, the gross profit has been estimated, that the assessee could not have sold the materials without purchasing them, that only profit element is assessed-pragmatic and possible view taken by the AO which could not be termed as absence of any enquiry or verification so as to permit the PCIT to assume the jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act. The revision orders passed by the PCIT were set aside and the appeals of the assessee allowed. (AY. 2013-14, 2015-16)