The Assessing Officer treated the assessee as a participant in an alleged price-rigging syndicate and estimated commission income on the basis of the Investigation Wing report, statements of alleged operators and unusual price movement in the shares of a listed company. The Tribunal held that no incriminating material was found during the search, the statements neither named the assessee nor were confronted to him, no opportunity of cross-examination was granted, and no corroborative evidence or cash trail was established. Suspicion, however strong, could not substitute for evidence. The deletion of the additions by the Commissioner (Appeals) was upheld.  The Assessing Officer estimated commission at 2 per cent. of the total value of transactions in the shares traded on the stock exchange on the assumption that the assessee was responsible for the alleged accommodation entry operations. The Tribunal held that there was no evidence establishing the assessee’s participation in the alleged syndicate or receipt of commission. Estimation based on presumptions and conjectures was unsustainable. The Assessing Officer estimated commission income on the basis of the statement of an office boy alleging that he handled cash on behalf of the assessee. The Tribunal held that the statement was unsupported by independent evidence, was denied by the assessee, and no cash trail was established. In the absence of corroborative material, the addition was rightly deleted  (AY.2013-14 to 2019-20).