Tribunal held that the entry provider in the entire statement had not stated that the investor company was one of the concerns controlled or managed by him in providing such accommodation entries. Therefore, the case of the Department was solely based on surmises that the investor company was one of the concerns managed and controlled by the entry provider and his involvement in providing the accommodation entries was only an assumption of incorrect facts. Even otherwise, the assessee in order to discharge its onus under section 68 had produced the permanent account number, Income-tax return and the assessment order of investor company. The Assessing Officer had not brought any material on record as a result of any enquiry. The commission issued had not yielded any result. Thus except for reliance on the statement of the entry provider, the Assessing Officer did not have any document in his possession or other facts detected as an outcome of enquiry. The entry provider had not made any allegation regarding transaction of investment made by the investor company. Therefore, the documentary evidence produced by the assessee could not be ignored or rejected.( AY.2012-13)