Held that the entire cash deposits in the bank account were directly made by the debtors of the assessee and the details of cash deposits from the parties were furnished before the Assessing Officer. The assessee had explained the questionnaire issued by the Assessing Officer and after the reply of the assessee, the Assessing Officer did not ask further questions, which clearly showed that the Assessing Officer was satisfied with the reply submitted by the assessee and passed the assessment order.  The press release issued by Department of Economic Affairs, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, dated November 8, 2016, had given power to the bank to accept specified bank notes from third parties. The Assessing Officer had also issued a questionnaire under section 142(1) on the lines of the CBDT notification for examination of cash deposited during demonetisation period and the assessee had submitted the reply. The Assessing Officer is  an investigating and an adjudicating officer. The Assessing Officer had issued notice under section 142(1) for investigating the matter which were subject matter of issues selected for scrutiny and the Assessing Officer was satisfied from the submissions by the assessee. When the Assessing Officer had formed one possible view, the Principal Commissioner could not exercise jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act. All the issues questioned by the Principal Commissioner in the revision proceedings, were already examined by the Assessing Officer at the time of assessment proceedings. Therefore, the Principal Commissioner is  not correct in observing that the Assessing Officer did not conduct proper enquiry on the issues before completion of assessment. It is  not necessary to give a detailed reason in the assessment order in respect of each and every question for the completion of assessment.(AY. 2017-18)