Tribunal held that though the assessee had failed to furnish documentary evidence to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer to prove the genuineness of purchases, the sales effected by the assessee had not been doubted. For this reason alone, the Assessing Officer had not disallowed the entire purchases, but had made an addition on peak basis which had been reduced to 12.5 per cent. of the non-genuine purchases by the Commissioner (Appeals). At the same time, the assessee’s contention that no addition could be made was not acceptable considering the fact that he had failed to prove the source of purchases through cogent evidence. Therefore, disallowance had to be made at 12.5 per cent. of the non-genuine purchases, but the assessee should get the benefit of the gross profit already declared. In other words, the addition on account of non-genuine purchases should be restricted to 12.5 per cent. less the gross profit already declared by the assessee.( AY.2009-10)