Allowing the appeal the Tribunal held that he Principal Commissioner had attempted to substitute his wisdom by views of the Assessing Officer without any definite basis. The view taken by the Assessing Officer was clearly plausible in law and could not have been displaced in a revisionary proceedings by a very untenable or a debatable view. Moreover, having come to the conclusion that the income should be taxed under the head Income from other sources it was not open to the Principal Commissioner to direct the Assessing Officer to make enquiries and verifications without keeping the issue open for him to be determined afresh. The Principal Commissioner had also failed to spell out what further enquiry or verifications were required to be made independently where all the evidence was already perused. The Principal Commissioner had failed to demonstrate any perceived error in the assessment order. The revisional order was to be set aside on the point of taxability of capital gains on sale of land parcel in question. (AY.2015-16)