Dismissing the appeal of the revenue the Court held that, the amount credited in bank vis-à-vis transactions  on behalf of clients. Assessee claimed that he had entered into the transaction not on his own behalf but on behalf of Mr. Chaturvedi who in turn was acting on behalf of  Shri Maharaj Investment (‘SMI’), The assessee was at the highest used as a conduit by the other parties and did not himself substantially gain from these transactions. Accordingly the addition  in the hands of assessee was not sustainable.  (AY.1992-93)