Section 37(1) & 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961—Business expenditure—For invoking powers conferred by  section 263,  the CIT should not only show that the AO's order is erroneous but CIT must also further show that as a result of an erroneous order, some loss is caused to the interest of the revenue Pr. CIT failed to make out a case that the order of AO is erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, which was a condition precedent for invoking jurisdiction u/s 263 as AO had taken note of the issue of provision of Rs. 5.75 crores claimed by the assessee as deduction and has raised queries and the assessee has duly replied  and the AO has accepted the claim of the assessee and since the provision the assessee claimed is an ascertained liability, there was no question that AO could have disallowed the same neither in the normal computation nor while computing book profit u/s 115JB,  so the AO has discharged his duty as an investigator as well as an adjudicator and allowed the claim which is a plausible view, which cannot at any rate be called as an unsustainable view, therefore, the impugned order of Ld. Pr. CIT is without jurisdiction and null in eyes of law—  Khetawat Properties Ltd. vs. Pr. CIT[2020] 180 ITD 535 (KOL)