Held that the Assessing Officer had not brought on record any concrete evidence even remotely to demonstrate that the assessee was an investor and had actually entered into the transactions reflected in the seized material on his own. Prior to making addition in respect of the peak of transactions reflected in the seized material, the Assessing Officer was duty-bound to have brought on record some cogent material to demonstrate that the assessee was an investor and the transactions reflected in the seized material had actually been carried out by the assessee, which the Assessing Officer has failed to do so. Tribunal  also held that   the brokerage income alone had to be brought to tax, it had to be on the total transactions or total turnover of the assessee. Addition of 1 Per Cent. of  total gross receipts is held to be  proper  (AY.2016-17)