Held, dismissing the appeal, that the Tribunal had dealt with the issue and found that the Assessing Officer thoroughly examined the sale of immovable property that had resulted in capital gains. He had examined the written reply, sale deed, purchase of property and computation of capital gains. He had also examined the evidence led by the assessee to claim benefit of section 54 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal had observed that the revisional authority had not expressed any doubt regarding the quantum of capital gains arising at the hands of the assessee and that it was invested in purchase and construction of residential house. Seen in the context of an assessee with modest means, the Commissioner had unnecessarily drawn up revision proceedings upon a procedural lapse as no real prejudice may have ever arisen to the Revenue authorities in the context of the petty amount involved. The Tribunal was justified in setting aside the order of revision.(AY.  2012-13)