Held that the Principal Commissioner had not pointed out what was the error in the reassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer and how it was prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue whereas the Principal Commissioner in his conclusion, accepted the submission of the assessee, cancellation of sale deed, etc., stated that these required further examination and verification. This could not be a ground to invoke revision proceedings under section 263 of the Act. Revision order was quashed. (AY. 2011-12)