Held that the books of account is not  rejected. Payments for purchases were  made through banking channel with customs duty.  Cash sales  are backed by corresponding purchases, reduction in stock and declaration of profits on sales. Addition is deleted. Additional ground is admitted. The Tribunal also held that suspicion, howsoever strong, cannot take the place of proof. The powers given to the Revenue authority, howsoever wide, do not entitle him to make the assessment on pure guess without reference to any evidence or material. The assessment cannot be framed only on bare suspicion. The assessment should rest on principles of law avoiding any presumption of evasion. Followed, Umacharan Shaw and Bros. v. CIT (1959) 37 ITR 271 (SC)  and Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT (1954) 26 ITR 775 (SC)  (AY.2017-18)