The Commissioner has revision order against which the appeal was filed before the Tribunal .The Tribunal held that the three units were located on different floors of the same structure and were purchased by the assessee by a common deed of conveyance. The Tribunal held that the two prerequisites that the order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, that an erroneous order did not necessarily mean an order with which the Principal Commissioner was unable to agree when there were two plausible views on the issue and one legally plausible view was adopted by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal quashed the revision order passed by the Principal Commissioner On appeal  dismissing the appeal the Court held that the findings of facts recorded by the Tribunal was that one of the requisite conditions for the exercise of power under section 263 the Commissioner should consider the assessment order to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue was not satisfied and in arriving at such conclusion the Tribunal had assigned cogent reasons. No question of law arose.( AY.2014-15)