Held that the Settlement Commission had not discarded the evidentiary value of the statement who had admitted to the modus operandi of availing of bogus purchase bills. The assessee had not raised the contention that the person whose statement was recorded was neither an employee nor a partner and that the assessee had not transacted with the person before the Settlement Commission nor the person had not denied the transaction between him and the assessee. The assessee had failed to rebut the statement by any documentary evidence. In the absence of any contradictory evidence, an addition to the gross profit margin at 12.5 percent on the bogus purchase was confirmed. Order of CIT(A) is affirmed. (AY. 2013-14, 2014-15)