AANYA DEVELOPERS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD

Assessee by : Shri G.C. Pipara, AR Revenue by : Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 18/06/2019 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement: 26/06/2019 आदेश/O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against order of the ld.CIT(A)-12, Ahmedabad dated 10.7.2018 passed for the Asstt.Year 2013-14.

2 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of property development and civil contractor. It has filed its return of income on 20.9.2013 declaring loss of Rs.6,61,964/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and notice under section 143(2) was issued on 8.9.2014 which was duly served upon the assessee. On scrutiny of the accounts, it revealed to the AO that the assessee had received unsecured loan of Rs.2,24,89,445/-. In order to verify the genuineness of the above loans, he raised a query bearing no.5 in the notice under section 142(1) issued on 11.6.2015. The AO has directed the assessee to furnish names and addresses of the persons from whom fresh unsecured loans/deposits were received by the assessee during the accounting year relevant to this assessment. The ld.AO has also directed to submit copies PANs, photo-copy of acknowledgement of ITRs, confirmation, balance sheets and evidence supporting credit-worthiness of deposits/lenders in respect of unsecured loans. According to the AO, the assessee has submitted partial details and sought adjournment. He further observed that 50 creditors had filed their return within the range of Rs.1,90,000/- to Rs.2,25,000/-; whereas all of them given loans to the assessee in the range of Rs.2,00,000/- to Rs.5,00,000/-. The assessee thereafter submitted further details and ultimately, the ld.AO issued notice under section 133(6) of the Act to 57 depositors requesting them to submit details of business they are carrying on; copy of returns; specimen copy of such queries has been reproduced by the AO. The ld.AO thereafter made an analysis of evidence submitted by the assessee as well as his observation. He compiled such details in tabular form and annexed those finding 3 with the assessment order as annexure-A. We take note of this annexure A-1, which reads as under: Annexure: A S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor 1 Amrit Bhai Patel 195600 300000 3773 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any surat which is done evidence in support of nature of from residence, hence business carried on by him. In I don’t possess any the computation of income, the evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed had given loan to income u/s 44 AD of the Act Muljibhai V Chaudhari without specifying the name and earlier which was nature of the business. Further, received back on no PAN, copy of ITR and bank 12/06/2012. The statement of Muljibhai V same was given by Chuadhary was given which me to the assessee as could justify that Muljibhai V loan. Chaudhari had taken loan from the depositor and repaid the same to him during the year which was further advanced by him to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 2 Arihant Exports 309000 550000 6818 In this case, notice issued u/s 133(6) of the Act returned unserved. The AR of the assessee vide order sheet entry dated 04-01-2016, was requested to provide the evidence sought for vide notice u/s. 133(6) of the Act but nothing was given in respect of loan transactions. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 3 Ashaben 196440 250000 3144 I am doing trading of The depositor had not given any Praveen Bhai goods and have no evidence in support of nature of Kubadiya proofs for same. I business carried on by her. In the had given loan to computation of income, the Hiteshbhai H Shah depositor had simply disclosed earlier which was income u/s 44AD of the Act received back and the without specifying the name and same was given by nature of the business. Further, me to the assessee as no PAN, copy of ITR and bank loan. statement of Hiteshbhai H Shah was given which could justify that Hiteshbhai H Shah had taken loan from the depositor and 4 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor repaid the same to her during the year which was further advanced by her to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 4 Ashwinbhai 193750 500000 8137 I am doing general The depositor had not given any Nagjibhai trading in Surat which evidence in support of nature of Vekariya is done from business carried on by him. In Residence, Hence I the computation of income, the don’t possess any depositor had simply disclosed evidence to submit. income u/s 44AD of the Act Amount in received without specifying the name and by me in pursuance nature of the business. Further, of sale done by me to no evidence was furnished with Dipak Gems. regard to purchase or stock of Diamond with the depositor which was stated to be sold to Dipak Gems. Mere stating that sale was done to Dipak Gems and sale proceed was given to the assessee as unsecured loan is a self-serving statement. It is not supported by any evidence, when the business is carried on from residence and no evidence of purchase or stock was given. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 5 Bharatbhai 196290 300000 2219 I am under business The depositor had not given any Shantilal Doshi of trading of evidence in support of nature of Diamonds and as this business carried on by him. In business is carried the computation of income, the from my residence. I depositor had simply disclosed had given loan to income u/s 44 AD of the Act Mansukhbhai K. Patel without specifying the name and earlier which was nature of the business. Further, received back and the no PAN, copy of ITR and bank same was given by statement of Mansukhbhai K. me to the assessee as Patel was given which could loan. justify that Mansukhbhai K. Patel had taken loan from the depositor and repaid the same to him during the year which was further advanced by him to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting 5 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor above mentioned transaction. 6 Birenbhai A 189970 600000 9173 I am doing business The depositor had not given any Sanghvi of retailer of Diamond evidence in support of nature of operating from my business carried on by him. In house, there is no the computation of income, the specific business depositor had simply disclosed address in support of income u/s 44 AD of the Act business carried. I without specifying the name and had given loan to nature of the business. Further, Chetan B. Shah no PAN, copy of ITR and bank earlier which was statement of Chetan Bhratbhai received back and the Shah was given which could same was given by justify that Chetan Bhratbhai me to the assessee as Shah had taken loan from the loan. depositor and repaid the same to him during the year which was further advanced by him to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 7 Chandrikaben K 193520 250000 7027 The depositor had not given any Doshi evidence in support of nature of business carried on by her. In the computation of income, the depositor had simply disclosed income u/s 44AD of the Act without specifying the name and nature of the business. Further, no PAN, copy of ITR and bank statement of Nileshbhai N. Patel was given which could justify that Nileshbhai N. Patel had taken loan from the depositor and repaid the same to her during the year which was further advance to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 8 Chetanbhai J 191590 400000 5030 In this case, notice issued u/s Shah 133(6) of the Act returned unserved. The AR of the assessee vide order sheet entry dated 04-01-2016, was requested to provide the evidence sought for vide notice u/s. 133(6) of the Act but nothing was given in respect of loan transactions. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as 6 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 9 Chintan P Doshi 196910 200000 5671 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any surat which is done evidence in support of nature of from residence, hence business carried on by him. In I don’t possess any the computation of income, the evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed had given loan to income u/s 44 AD of the Act Prakash A. Doshi without specifying the name and earlier which was nature of the business. Further, received back and the no PAN, copy of ITR and bank same was given by statement of Prakash A. Doshi me to the assessee as was given which could justify loan that Prakash A. Doshi had taken loan from the depositor and repaid the same to him during the year which was further advanced by him to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 10 Darshnaben P 196790 250000 3576 I am doing retail The depositor had not given any Shah trading from my evidence in support of nature of house, I have no any business carried on by her. In the evidence in support of computation of income, the business carried. I depositor had simply disclosed have given loan to income u/s 44AD of the Act the assessee from without specifying the name and sale proceeds from nature of the business. Further, M/s. Raj & Sons and no evidence was furnished with Sejal R. Mehta regard to purchase or stock with the depositor which was stated to be sold to M/s. Raj & Sons and Sejal R Mehta. It is very surprising that what was sold is not at all mentioned by the depositor. Mere stating that sale was done to M/s. Raj & Sons and Sejal R Mehta and sale proceed was given to the assessee as unsecured loan is a self-serving statement. It is not supported by any evidence, when the business is carried on from residence and no evidence of purchase or stock was given. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 11 Deveshbhai M 195840 500000 7151 I am doing general The depositor had not given any 7 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor Shah trading in surat which evidence in support of nature of is done from business carried on by him. In residence, hence I the computation of income, the don’t possess any depositor had simply disclosed evidence to submit. income u/s 44AD of the Act Amount in received without specifying the name and by me in pursuance nature of the business. Further, of sale done by me to no evidence was furnished with M/s. Raj & Sons regard to purchase or stock of diamond with the depositor which was stated to be sold to M/s. Raj & Sons. Mere stating that sale was done to M/s. Raj & Sons and sale proceed was given to the assessee as unsecured loan is a self-serving statement. It is not supported by any evidence, when the business is carried on from residence and no evidence of purchase or stock was given. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 12 Gautam Jems 197950 250000 3699 I have done business The depositor had not given any of retailer of Diamond evidence in support of nature of operating at my business carried on by her. In the house, there is no computation of income, the specific business depositor had simply disclosed address in support of income u/s 44 AD of the Act business carried. I without specifying the name and had given loan to nature of the business. Further, M/s. Radhe no PAN, copy of ITR and bank Corporation earlier statement of M/s. Radhe which was received Corporation was given which back and the same could justify that M/s. Radhe was given by me to Corporation had taken loan from the assessee as loan. the depositor and repaid the same to him during the year which was further advanced by her to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 13 Ghanshyambhai 211550 250000 3144 No reply as required vide notice G Rokhaliya u/s 133(6) was given. The earlier submission filed was again sent. Since, no evidence in respect of source of deposit of Rs.250000/- in the bank account was given by the depositor which was later on given by the depositor to the 8 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor assessee, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 14 Ghanshyambhai 215000 500000 14178 We have received The depositor had not given any V Kabariya payment of evidence in support of nature of Rs.5,00,000/- on 06- business carried on by him. In 12-2012 of Polished the computation of income, the Diamond Sales from depositor had simply disclosed M/s. Mahashakti income u/s 44AD of the Act Gems without specifying the name and nature of the business. Further, no evidence was furnished with regard to purchase or stock of polished Diamond with the depositor which was stated to be sold to M/s. Mahashakti Gems. Mere stating that sale was done to M/s. Mahashakti Gems and sale proceed was given to the assessee as unsecured loan is a self-serving statement. It is not supported by any evidence, when the business is carried on from residence and no evidence of purchase or stock was given. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 15 Girishbhai L 191880 200000 2712 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Vora Surat which is done evidence in support of nature of from residence, hence business carried on by him. In I don’t possess any the computation of income, the evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed am saying that of income u/s 44AD of the Act Rs.200000 received without specifying the name and by me is in purchase nature of the business. Further, of loan taken by me no PAN, copy of ITR and bank from Mittal V. Vora statement of Mittal V. Vora was given which could justify the genuineness of the loan taken by the depositor from Mittal V. Vora and creditworthiness of Mittal V. Vora who had given to the depositor. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 16 Gitaben 196980 250000 1849 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Jagabhai Patel Surat which is done evidence in support of nature of 9 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor from residence, hence business carried on by her. In the I don’t possess any computation of income, the evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed am saying that the income u/s 44AD of the Act amount received by without specifying the name and me is in pursuance of nature of the business. Further, sale done by me to no evidence was furnished with Mansukhbhai K regard to purchase or stock with Bhalala. the depositor which was stated to be sold Mansukhbhai K Bhalala. It is very surprising that what was sold is not at all mentioned by the depositor. Mere stating that sale was done to Mansukhbhai K Bhalala and sale proceed was given to the assessee as unsecured loan is a self-serving statement. It is not supported by any evidence, when the business is carried on from residence and no evidence of purchase or stock was given. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 17 Gomtiben 196810 250000 7027 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Jivrajbhai Surat which is done evidence in support of nature of Chaudhary from residence, hence business carried on by him. In I don’t possess any the computation of income, the evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed had given loan to income u/s 44 AD of the Act Jivrajbhai S. without specifying the name and Chaudhary earlier nature of the business. Further, which was received no PAN, copy of ITR and bank back on 06-12-2012 statement of Jivrajbhai S. and the same was Chaudhary was given which given by me to the could justify that Jivrajbhai S. assessee as loan Chaudhary had taken loan from the depositor and repaid the same to him during the year which was further advanced by her to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 18 Gomtiben 197170 150000 999 In this case, notice issued u/s Bhurabhai Patel 133(6) of the Act returned unserved. The AR of the assessee vide order sheet entry dated 04-01-2016, was requested to provide the evidence sought 10 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor for vide notice u/s. 133(6) of the Act but nothing was given in respect of load transactions. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 19 Harjibhai 195700 200000 2712 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Devarambhai Surat which is done evidence in support of nature of Patel from residence, hence business carried on by him. In I don’t possess any the computation of income, the evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed had given loan to income u/s 44 AD of the Act Pritiben J. Shah without specifying the name and earlier which was nature of the business. Further, received back on 02- no PAN, copy of ITR and bank 02-2013 and the statement of Pritiben J. Shah was same was given by given which could justify that me to the assessee as Pritiben J. Shah had taken loan loan from the depositor and repaid the same to him during the year which was further advanced by him to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 20 Hetalben 195600 525000 7767 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Mehulbhai Surat which is done evidence in support of nature of Dharu from residence, hence business carried on by him. In I don’t possess any the computation of income, the evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed have given loan to income u/s 44AD of the Act the assessee out of without specifying the name and sale proceeds from nature of the business. Further, Vitragbhai Dhirajlal no evidence was furnished with Dharu regard to purchase or stock with the depositor which was stated to be sold Viragbhai D Dharu. It is very surprising that what was sold is not at all mentioned by the depositor. Mere stating that sale was done to Vitragbhai D Dharuand sale proceed was given to the assessee as unsecured loan is a self-serving statement. It is not supported by any evidence, when the business is carried on from residence and no evidence of purchase or stock was given. It is very relevant to mention here that Hetalben Dharu deposited cash of Rs.

11 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor 3,00,000/- each on 11-12-2012 & 07-01-2013and then, cheque was issued to Vitragbhai D. Dharu. Thereafter, Vitragbhai D. Dharu issued cheque of Rs.5,25,000/- to Hetalben Dharu. This clearly proves that there was no sale transaction and cash was deposited and rotated to the books of the assessee. It is also relevant to mention that Hetalben Dharu stated that she had received sale proceeds from Vitragbhai Dharu, whereas Vitragbhai Dharu stated that he had received loan from her and given to the assessee. Therefore, there is a clear contradiction in the statement of both the depositor who had given loan to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 21 Jagdishbhai D 199220 250000 3575 I have done business The depositor had not given any Padhiyar of Diamond Retail evidence in support of nature of Trading. I have no business carried on by him. In any evidence in the computation of income, the support of business depositor had simply disclosed carried as it is not income u/s 44AD of the Act fixed. I Have given without specifying the name and loan to the assessee nature of the business. Further, out of sale proceeds no evidence was furnished with from M/s. Sundha regard to purchase or stock with Gems. the depositor which was stated to be sold to M/s. Sundha Gems. It is very surprising that what was sold is not at all mentioned by the depositor. Mere stating that sale was done to M/s. Sundha Gems and sale proceed was given to the assessee as unsecured loan is a self-serving statement. It is not supported by any evidence, when the business is carried on from residence and no evidence of purchase or stock was given. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction.

12 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor 22 Jayshreeben K 206240 550000 8137 I am doing business The depositor had not given any Sanghvi of Retailer and evidence in support of nature of Operating at my business carried on by her. In house. There is no the computation of income, the specific business depositor had simply disclosed address in support of income u/s 44AD of the Act business carried. I without specifying the name and had given loan to nature of the business. Further, M/s. Radhe no PAN, copy of ITR and bank Corporation earlier statement of M/s Radhe which was received Corporation was given which back and the same could justify that M/s Radhe was given by me to Corporation had taken loan from the assessee as loan. the depositor and repaid the same to him during the year which was further advanced by her to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 23 Jitendrabhai 193450 300000 8507 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Himatlal Shah surat which is done evidence in support of nature of from residence, hence business carried on by him. In I don’t possess any the computation of income, the evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed had given loan to income u/s 44AD of the Act Rutikaben A. Shah without specifying the name and earlier which was nature of the business. Further, received back on no PAN, copy of ITR and bank 06.12.2012 and the statement of Rutikaben A. Shah same was given by was given which would could me to the assessee as justify that Rutikaben A. Shah loan. had taken loan from the depositor and repaid the same to him during the year which was further advanced by him to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 24 Kiranben 195880 300000 8359 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Dilipbhai Shah surat which is done evidence in support of nature of from residence, hence business carried on by him. In I don’t possess any the computation of income, the evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed had given loan to income u/s 44AD of the Act Ashokbhai B. Doshi without specifying the name and HUF earlier which was nature of the business. Further, received back on no PAN, copy of ITR and bank 08.12.2012 and the statement of Ashokbhai B. Doshi same was given by HUF was given which could me to the assesseee justify that Ashokbhai B. Doshi 13 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor as loan. HUF had taken loan from the depositor and repaid the same to him during the year which was further advanced by her to the assesseee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 25 Laljibhai 193160 350000 9407 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Devrambhai surat which done evidence in support of nature of Patel from residence, hence business carried on by him. In don’t possess any the computation of income, the evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed am saying that of Rs. income u/s 44AD of the Act 350000 received by without specifying the name and me is in pursuance of nature of the business. Further, loan taken by me no PAN, copy of ITR and bank from Ritesh R. Saliya statement Ritesh R. Saliya & & Ramjibhai G. Patel. Ramjibhai G. Patel was given which could justify the genuineness of the loan taken by the depositor from Ritesh R. Saliya & Ramjibhai G. Patel and creditworthiness of Ritesh R. Saliya & Ramjibhai G. Patel who had given loan to the depositor. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 26 Mahendra 197410 300000 8063 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Dhirubhai surat which is done evidence in support of nature of Pipalya from residence, hence business carried on by him. In I don’t possess any the computation of income, the evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed am saying that of Rs income u/s 44 AD of the Act 300000 received by without specifying the name and me on 12.12.2012 is nature of the business. Further, in pursuance of loan no PAN, copy of ITR and bank taken by me from statement of Nitaben K. Pipaliya Nitaben K. Pipaliya. was given which could justify the genuineness of the loan taken by the depositor from Nitaben K. Pipaliya and creditworthiness of Nitaben K. Pipaliya who had givan loan to the depositor. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction.

14 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor 27 Mahendrabhai 196330 250000 6596 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Shantilal Doshi Surat which is done evidence in support of nature of HUF from residence, hence business carried on by him. In I don’t possess any the computation of income, the evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed am saying that of Rs. income u/s 44AD of the Act 250000 received by without specifying the name and me on 14.12.2012 is nature of the business. Further, in pursuance of loan no PAN, copy of ITR and bank taken by me from statement of Mitul M Shah was Mitul M Shah. given which could justify the genuineness of the loan taken by the depositor from Mitul M shah and creditworthiness of Mitul M shah who had given loan to the depositor. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 28 Maheshbhai 195450 600000 17014 We Have received The depositor had not given any Devshibhai payment of Rs. evidence in support of nature of Koladiya 6,00,000/- on business carried on by him. In 06.12.2012 of the computation of income, the Polished Diamond depositor had simply disclosed Sales from M/s. income u/s 44AD of the Act Bhuvneshvari without specifying the name and Diamond. nature of the business. Further, no evidence was furnished with regard to purchase or stock of Polished Diamond with the depositor which was stated to be sold to M/s Bhuvneshvari Diamond. Mere stating that sale was done to M/s Bhuvneshvari Diamond and sale proceed was given to the assessee as unsecured loan is a self-serving statement. It is not supported by any evidence, when the business is carried on from residence and no evidence of purchase or stock was given. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 29 Maheshbhai 208550 700000 8803 In this case, notice issued u/s Nanjibhai 133(6) of the Act returned Savliya unserved. The AR of the assessee vide order sheet entry dated 04.01.2016, was requested to provide the evidence sought for vide notice u/s .133(6) of the 15 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor Act but nothing was given in respect of loan transactions. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 30 Mehulbhai 185540 525000 8544 I am doing purchase The depositor had not given any Sumatilal Shah and sale along with evidence in support of nature of LIC commission business carried on by him. In income in surat which the computation of income, the is done from depositor had simply disclosed residence, hence I income u/s 44 AD of the Act don’t possess any without specifying the name and evidence to submit. I nature of the business. Further, am saying that I had no PAN, copy of ITR and bank given loan to Chetan statement of Chetan Bharatbhai B. Shah earlier which Shah was given which could was received back on justify that Chetan Bharatbhai 05.02.2013 and the Shah had taken loan from the same was given by depositor and repaid the same to me to the assessee as him during the year which was loan. further advanced by him to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 32 Mukeshbhai B 195740 500000 8137 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Malaviya HUF Surat, which is done evidence in support of nature of from residence, hence business carried on by him. In I don’t possess any the computation of income, the evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed had given loan to the income u/s 44 AD of the Act Assesseee out of sale without specifying the name and proceeds from Vijay nature of the business. Further, K. Talaviya no evidence was furnished with regard to purchase or stock with the depositor which stated to be sold to Vijay K. Talaviya. It is very surprising that what was sold is not at all mentioned by the depositor. Mere stating that sale was done to Vijay K. Talaviya and sale process was given to the assessee as unsecured loan is a self-serving statement. It is not supported by any evidence, when the business is carried on from residence and no evidence of purchase or stock was given. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in 16 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction 33 Nayanaben 197930 225000 6103 I am under business The depositor had not given any Jagdishbhai of trading of Diamond evidence in support of nature of Bhansali as this business is business carried on by him. In carried from my the computation of income, the residence no evidence depositor had simply disclosed is submitted. I had income u/s 44AD of the Act given loan to without specifying the name and Vardhman Developers nature of the business. Further, earlier which was no PAN, copy of ITR and bank received back on statement of Vardhman 08.12.2012 and the Developers was given which same was given by could justify that Vardhman me to assesseee as Developers had taken loan from loan. Further, I had the depositor and repaid the taken loan from same to him during the year Bhavnaben J. Doshi which was further advanced by on 11.12.2012 which her to the assessee. was also given by me Furthermore, no PAN, copy of to assessee as a loan. ITP and bank statement of Bhavnaben J. Doshi was given which could justify the genuineness of the loan taken by the depositors from Bhavnaben J. Doshi and creditworthiness of the Bhavnaben J. Doshi who had given loan to the depositors. Therefore, Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 34 Niteshbhai No ITR 300000 3773 In this case, notice issued u/s Dineshchandra 133(6) of the Act returned Shah unserved. The AR of the assessee vide order sheet entry dated 04.01.2016, was requested to provide the evidence sought for vide notice u/s. 133(6) of the Act but nothing was given in respect of loan transactions. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 35 Pari Jems 196030 250000 3699 I have done business The depositor had not given any of Retail Diamond evidence in support of nature of Trading and I have business carried on by her. In the no any evidence of computation of income, the business carried. I depositor had simply disclosed had given loan to income u/s 44AD of the Act M/s. Radhe without specifying the name and 17 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor Corporation earlier nature of the business. Further, which was received no PAN, copy of ITP and bank back and the same statement of M/s Radhe was given by me to Corporation was given which the assessee as loan. could justify that M/s Radhe Corporation had taken loan to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositors is treated as unexplained in absence evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 38 Poojaben 173980 200000 1825 I am into business of The depositor had not given any Hasmukhlal Purchase / Sale of evidence in support of nature of Mehta Diamonds and it is business carried on by her. In the done in market no computation of income, the proofs is there. I had depositor had simply disclosed given loan to income u/s 44 AD of the Act Hasmukhbhai Mehta without specifying the name and earlier which was nature of the business. Further, received back and the no PAN, copy of ITR and bank same was given by statement of Hasmukhbhai Mehta me to the assesseee was given which could justify as loan. that Hasmukhbhai Mehta had taken loan from the depositor and repaid the same to him during the year which was further advanced by her to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 39 Pravinchandra K 193350 525000 7638 I am doing business The depositor had not given any Shah of Retailer of evidence in support of nature of Diamond, operating business carried on by her. In the at my house there is computation of income, the no specific business depositor had simply disclosed address however in income u/s 44 AD of the Act support of business without specifying the name and carried. I had given nature of the business. Further, loan to M/s. Radhe no PAN, copy of ITR and bank Corporation earlier statement of M/s Radhe which was received Corporation was given which back and the same could justify that M/s Radhe was given by me to Corporation had taken loan from the assessee as loan. the depositor and repaid the same to him during the year which was further advanced by her to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction.

18 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor 40 Pravinbhai G 195740 375000 5733 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Shah HUF surat which is done evidence in support of nature of from residence, hence business carried on by him. In I don’t possess any the computation of income, the evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed am saying that of income u/s 44 AD of the Act Rs.375000 received without specifying the name and on 28.01.2013 by me nature of the business. Further, is pursuance of loan no PAN, copy of ITR and bank taken by me from statement of Pravinbhai G. Shah Pravinbhai G. Shah. was given which could justify the genuineness of the loan taken by the depositor from Pravinbhai G.Shah who had given loan to the depositor. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 43 Rameshbhai 195660 400000 5425 In this case, notice issued u/s Mohanlal Shah 133(6) of the Act returned HUF unserved. The AR of the assessee vide order sheet entry dated 04.01.2016, was requested to provide the evidence sought for vide notice u/s.133(6) of the Act but nothing was given in respect of loan transactions. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 45 Ranjitbhai V 193700 400000 5918 I have done business The depositor had not given any Padhiyar of Retail of Diamond evidence in support of nature of Trading and I have business carried on by her. In the no any evidence of computation of income, the business carried. I depositor had simply disclosed had given loan to income u/s 44 AD of the Act M/s. Radhe without specifying the name and Corporation earlier nature of the business. Further, which was received no PAN, copy of ITR and bank back and the same statement of M/s Radhe was given by me to Corporation was given which the assessee as loan. could justify that M/s Radhe Corporation had taken loan from the depositor and repaid the same to him during the year which was further advanced by her to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction.

19 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor 46 Sahilbhai 198520 250000 3144 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Hasmukhlal surat which is done evidence in support of nature of Mehta from residence, hence business carried on by him. In I don’t possess any the computation of income, the evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed am saying that of income u/s 44 AD of the Act Rs.250000 received without specifying the name and on 08.02.2013 by me nature of the business. Further, is pursuance of loan no PAN, copy of ITR and bank taken by me from statement of Poojaben H. Mehta Poojaben H. Mehta was given which could justify the Genuineness of the loan taken by the depositor from Poojaben H. Mehta and creditworthiness of Poojaben H. Mehta who had given loan to the depositor. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 47 Sangitaben 197570 300000 2219 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Kalpeshbhai surat which is done evidence in support of nature of Doshi from Residence, business carried on by him. In hence I don’t possess the computation of income, the any evidence to depositor had simply disclosed submit. I have given income u/s 44 AD of the Act loan to the assessee without specifying the name and out of sale proceeds nature of the business. Further, from Mansukhbhai K. no evidence was furnished with Bhalia. regard to purchase or stock with the depositor which was stated to be sold to Manuskhbhai K. Bhalala. It is very surprising that what was sold is not at all mentioned by the depositor. Mere stating that sale was done to Mansukhbhai K. Bhalala and sale proceed was given to the assessee as unsecured loan is a self-serving statement. It is not supported by any evidence, when the business is carried on from residence and no evidence of purchase or stock was given. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 49 Sanjaybhai 1936000 350000 9752 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Nanalal Shah surat which is done evidence in support of nature of HUF from residence, hence business carried on by him. In I don’t possess any the computation of income, the 20 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed am saying that of Rs. income u/s 44AD of the Act 375000 received on without specifying the name and 28.01.2013 by me is nature of the business. Further, in pursuance of loan no PAN, copy of ITR and bank taken by me from statement of Ajay R Salvi & Ajay R Salvi & Hitesh Hitesh R. Shah was given which R. Shah could justify the genuineness of the loan taken by the depositor from Ajay R Salvi & Hitesh R. Shah and creditworthiness of Ajay R Salvi & Hitesh R. Shah who had given loan to the depositor. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence supporting above mentioned transaction. 50 Sanjaybhai 195550 325000 8575 In this case, notice issued u/s Vardhilal 133(6) of the Act returned Sanghvi unserved. The AR of the assessee vide order sheet entry dated 04.01.2016, was requested to provide the evidence sought for vide notice u/s. 133(6) of the Act but nothing was given in respect of load transactions. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 51 Shaileshgiri 198370 250000 6658 I am doing general The depositor had not given any Gulabgiri trading in Surat which evidence in support of nature of Goswami is done from business carried on by him. In residence, Hence I the computation of income, the don’t possess any depositor had simply disclosed evidence to submit. I income u/s 44AD of the Act had given loan to without specifying the name and Rameshbhai L Diyora nature of the business. Further, earlier which was no PAN, copy of ITR and bank received back on statement of Rameshbhai L 12.12.2012. The Diyora was given which could same was given by justify that Rameshbhai L Diyora me to the assesseee had taken loan from the as loan. depositor and repaid the same to him during the year which was further advanced by him to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction.

21 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor 52 Shantilal Manilal 198080 675000 6158 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Mehta surat which is done evidence in support of nature of from Residence, business carried on by him. In hence I don’t possess the computation of income, the any evidence to depositor had simply disclosed submit. I have given income u/s 44 AD of the Act loan to the assesseee without specifying the name and out of sale proceeds nature of the business. Further, from Bharatbhai B. no evidence was furnished with Ghelani. regard to purchase or stock with the depositor which was stated to be sold to Bharatbhai B. Ghelani. It is very surprising that what was sold is not at all mentioned by the depositor. Mere stating that sale was done to Bharatbhai B. Ghelani and sale proceed was given to the assessee as unsecured loan is a self-serving statement. It is not supported by any evidence, when the business is carried on from residence and no evidence of purchase or stack was given. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mention transaction. 53 Shilpaben 194630 500000 4562 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Champaklal surat which is done evidence in support of nature of Shah from residence, hence business carried on by him. In I don’t possess any the computation of income, the evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed have given loan to income u/s 44AD of the Act the assessee out of without specifying the name and sale proceeds from nature of the business. Further, Mansukhbhai K. no evidence was furnished with Bhalala regard to purchase or stock with the depositor which was stated to be sold to Mansukhbhai K. Bhalala. It is very surprising that what was sold is not at all mentioned by the depositor. Mere stating that sale was done to Mansukhbhai K. Bhalala and sale proceed was given to the assessee as unsecured loan is a self-serving statement. It is not supported by any evidence, when the business is carried on from residence and no evidence of purchase or stock was given. Therefore, creditworthiness of 22 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 54 Sushilaben 194550 300000 3995 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Rameshbhai surat which is done evidence in support of nature of Shah from residence, hence business carried on by him. In I don’t possess any the computation of income, the evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed had given loan to income u/s 44AD of the Act Rameshbhai M Shah without specifying the name and HUF earlier which was nature of the business. Further, received back on no PAN, copy of ITR and bank 05.02.2013. The statement of Rameshbhai M Shah same was given by HUF was given which could me to the assessee as justify that Rameshbhai M Shah loan. HUF had taken loan from the depositor and repaid the same to him during the year which was further advanced by him to the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction. 57 Vitragbhai 197690 300000 8063 I am doing trading in The depositor had not given any Dhirajlal Dharu surat which is done evidence in support of nature of from residence, hence business carried on by him. In I don’t possess any the computation of income, the evidence to submit. I depositor had simply disclosed am saying that of income u/s 44AD of the Act Rs.300000 received without specifying the name and by me is in pursuance nature of the business. Further, it of loan taken by me is very surprising that Hetalben from Hetalben Dharu Dharu Stated that she had on 12.12.2012. received sale proceeds from Vitragbhai Dharu,whereas Vitrangbhai Dharu stated that he had received loan from her and given to the assessee. Therefore, there is clear contradiction in the statement of both the depositor who had given loan to the assessee. It is a willfull attempt both by Hetalben Dharu and Viragbhai D.Dharu to route unexplained money to the books of accounts of the assessee. No evidence of sale of item was given by Hetalben Dharu and no explanation was given by Hetalben Dharu with regard to cash deposits of RS.3,00,000/- each on 11.12.2012 & 23 S. Name of Party ITR Loan Interest Submission of the Findings No given Depositor 07.01.2013 in her bank account and thereafter issuing cheque to Vitragbhai D. Dharu. Similarly, Vitragbhai D. Dharu issued cheque of RS.5,25,000/- to Hetalben Dharu for the purchase of items but what was done with the item purchased and where such items were accounted for in books had not been explained by Vitragbhai D. Dharu. This clearly proves that there was no sale/purchase transaction between them and cash was deposited and rotated to the books of the assessee. Therefore, creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence supporting above mentioned transaction.

In the passbook of the depositor at page no. 29 of paperbook, it is reflected that amount was received from Muljibhai Requisite details are submitted at page In the passbook of the depositor at page no. 34 of paperbook, it is reflected that amount was received from Hiteshbhai In the bank passbook of the depositor of paperbook, it is reflected amount of loan is earlier received in bank account. Explanation of the appellant firm 176 no. 232 to 234 of paperbook. no. page at V. Chaudhari. submitted H. Shah. There is no evidence that amount was received from Muljibhai V. Notice u/s 133(6) was unserved and no response is received from There is no evidence that amount was received from Hiteshbhai H. Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in Observation of the Assessing absence of evidence Chaudhari. depositor Officer Shah. Page No. of Paperbook 175-176 28-29 33-34 232 233 234 173 174 177 the 26 27 30 31 32 35 Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Bank of India Account 2013-14 Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Bank of India Account 2013-14 Bank (c) Passbook of Akhand Anand Co- (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (c) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. of of of of AY AY AY AY Evidences submitted Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation of of of of ITR ITR ITR ITR Details (b) (b) (b) (b) (a) (a) (a) (a) op Credited 3773 6818 3144 8137 the year Interest during (Rs.) 300000 550000 250000 500000 during the year (Rs.) Received Loan Amratbhai Patel Arihant Exports Ashvinbhai Pravinbhai depositor Nagjibhai Kubadiya Vekariya Name of Ashaben Order No. as Chart of the per Sr. 1 2 3 4 In the bank passbook of the depositor submitted at page no. 39 of paperbook, it is reflected amount of loan is earlier In the passbook of the depositor at page no. 44 of paperbook, it is reflected that amount was received from Chetanbhai The ledger account of depositor in the books of accounts of Nileshbhai Narsangbhai Patel is placed at page no. 50 of paperbook, where it is reflected to Requisite details are submitted at page The passbook and ledger account of the depositor in the books of accounts of Prakashbhai Doshi is placed at page no. 54 to 56 of paperbook, where it is reflected that amount has been paid to paid no. 235 to 240 of paperbook. been received in bank account. Chandrikaben Doshi. has Bharatbhai Shah. Chintan Doshi. amount that Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in There is no evidence that amount was received from Chetanbhai There is no evidence that amount was received from Nileshbhai Notice u/s 133(6) was unserved and no response is received from There is no evidence that amount was received from Prakashbhai absence of evidence. Narsangbhai Patel. Bharatbhai Shah. depositor Doshi. 236-238 464748- 495051 38-39 43-44 54-55 235 239 240 36 37 40 41 42 45 52 53 56 57 25 Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Bank of India Account 2013-14 UBI (a) Confirmation of Account(b) ITR of AY 2013-14(c) Passbook of Bank of India(d) Ledger Account in Patel(e) Account (b) ITR & COI of AY 2013-14 Passbook Account 2013-14 Bank (d) Ledger Account in books of Doshi (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (e) Repayment of Loan A/c. Dena of Nileshbhai Repayment of Loan A/c. of of of of AY AY AY of Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Passbook Bank of of of Passbook Prakashbhai of ITR ITR ITR books (b) (b) (b) (a) (a) (c) (a) (c) (a) (c) 2219 9173 7027 5030 5671 300000 600000 250000 400000 200000 Shantilal Doshi Chintan Doshi Chandrikaben Chetanbhai J Birenbhai A Bharatbhai Sanghavi K Doshi Shah 5 6 7 8 9 In the bank passbook of the depositor of paperbook, it is reflected amount of In the bank statement of the depositor of paperbook, it is reflected amount of In the bank statement of the depositor at page no. 60 of paperbook, it is reflected that amount was received Requisite details are submitted at page In the bank passbook of the depositor at page no. 190 of paperbook, it is reflected that amount was received In the bank passbook of the depositor submitted at page no. 65 of paperbook, it is reflected amount of loan is earlier In the bank passbook of the depositor of paperbook, it is reflected amount of loan is earlier received in bank account. loan is earlier received in bank account. loan is earlier received in bank account. 181 185 195 from M/s. Radhe Corporation. M/s. Mahashakti Gems. no. 241 to 243 of paperbook. no. no. no. received in bank account. page page page at at at submitted submitted submitted Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in There is no evidence that amount was received from M/s. Radhe Notice u/s 133(6) was unserved and no response is received from There is no evidence that amount M/s. Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in from absence of evidence. absence of evidence. absence of evidence absence of evidence Mahashakti Gems. received Corporation. depositor was 241242243 180-181 189-190 194-195 64-65 178 179 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 191 192 193 196 58 59 60 61 62 63 66 26 Account 2013-14 UBI Account 2013-14 UBI Account 2013-14 UBI (a) Confirmation of Account(b) ITR of AY 2013-14(c) Repayment Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Vijaya Bank Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Bank of India Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Bank of India of of (e) Repayment of Loan A/c. (e) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (e) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. of of of of of of of AY AY Statement AY Statement AY AY AY Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Passbook of of of of of of of Loan A/c. Bank Bank ITR ITR ITR ITR ITR ITR (b) (b) (b) (b) (b) (b) (a) (c) (a) (c) (a) (c) (a) (a) (a) 3575 7151 3699 3144 14178 2712 1849 250000 500000 250000 250000 500000 200000 250000 Ghanshyambhai Darshanaben P Deveshbhai M Ghanshyambhai Gautam Gems Jagabhai Patel Girishbhai L. G Rakholiya V Kabariya Gitaben Shah Shah Vora 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 The ledger account of the depositor in the books of accounts of Jivrajbhai Chaudhary is placed at page no. 71 of paperbook, where it is reflected that amount has been paid to Gomtiben Requisite details are submitted at page In the bank passbook of the depositor submitted at page no. 76 of paperbook, it is reflected amount of loan is earlier The ledger account of the depositor in the books of accounts of Vitragbhai D. Dharu is placed at page no. 50 of paperbook, where it is reflected that amount has been paid to Hetalben M. In the bank statement of the depositor of paperbook, it is reflected amount of loan is earlier received in bank account. no. 244 to 248 of paperbook. no. received in bank account. page at Chaudhary. submitted Dharu. There is no evidence that amount was received from Jivrajbhai S. Notice u/s 133(6) was unserved and no response is received from Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in There is no evidence that amount was received from Vitragbhai D. Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in absence of evidence. absence of evidence. Chaudhary. depositor Dharu. 246-247 199-200 737475- 69-70 7778 244 245 248 197 198 201 202 203 204 205 206 67 68 71 72 27 Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Bank of India (d) Ledger Account in books of Chaudhary Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Bank of India (a) Confirmation of Account(b) ITR of AY 2013-14(c) Passbook of Bank of India(d) Repayment of Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Bank of India (d) Ledger Account in books of Dharu Account 2013-14 UBI of (e) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (e) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. of of of of AY AY AY AY Statement D. Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation of of of of Bank ITR Jivrajibhai ITR ITR Vitragbhai ITR Loan A/c. (b) (b) (b) (b) (a) (a) (a) (a) (c) 7027 999 2712 7767 3575 250000 150000 200000 525000 250000 Bhurabhai Patel Jagdishbhai D Devrambhai Chaudhary Mehulbhai Gomtiben Gomtiben Harjibhai Hetalben Padhiyar Dharu Patel 17 18 19 20 21 In the bank passbook of the depositor at page no. 82 of paperbook, it is reflected that amount was received from M/s. In the bank passbook of the depositor at page no. 87 of paperbook, it is reflected from In the bank passbook of the depositor submitted at page no. 92 of paperbook, it is reflected amount of loan is earlier In the bank passbook of the depositor submitted at page no. 97 of paperbook, it is reflected amount of loan is earlier In the bank passbook of the depositor of paperbook, it is reflected amount of The ledger account of the depositor in the books of accounts of Mitul M. Shah is placed at page no. 108 of paperbook, where it is reflected that amount has loan is earlier received in bank account. been paid to Mahendra S. Doshi HUF. 100 received no. received in bank account. received in bank account. page was Radhe Corporation. Rutikaben A. Shah. at amount submitted that There is no evidence that amount was received from M/s. Radhe There is no evidence that amount was received from Rutikaben A. Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in There is no evidence that amount was received from Mitul M. absence of evidence. absence of evidence. absence of evidence. Corporation. Shah. Shah. 101-102 106-107 949596- 81-82 86-87 91-92 9798 100 103 104 105 108 109 79 80 83 84 85 88 89 90 93 99 28 Account 2013-14 UBI Account 2013-14 Bank Account 2013-14 Bank (a) Confirmation of Account(b) ITR of AY 2013-14(c) Passbook of Bank of India(d) Repayment of Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Bank of India Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Bank of India (d) Ledger Account in books of Shah (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (e) Repayment of Loan A/c. Dena Dena of of of of of of AY AY AY AY AY of of M. Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Passbook of of of of of Passbook Passbook ITR ITR ITR ITR ITR Loan A/c. Mitul (b) (b) (b) (b) (b) (a) (c) (a) (c) (a) (c) (a) (a) 8137 8507 8359 9407 8063 6596 550000 300000 300000 350000 300000 250000

Shantilal Doshi Dilipbhai Shah Jayshreeben K Himatlal Shah Devrambhai Jitendrabhai Mahendra Dhirubhai Mahendra Kiranbhai Sanghavi Laljibhai Pipaliya Patel HUF 22 23 24 25 26 27 In the bank passbook of the depositor of paperbook, it is reflected amount of Requisite details are submitted at page In the passbook of the depositor at page no. 113 of paperbook, it is reflected from In the bank passbook of the depositor of paperbook, it is reflected amount of In the passbook of the depositor at page no. 118 of paperbook and the ledger accounts of the depositor in the books of accounts of Vardhman Developers and Bhavnaben Doshi placed at page of paperbook respectively, it is reflected that amount Requisite details are submitted at page loan is earlier received in bank account. loan is earlier received in bank account. has been paid to Nayanaben Bhansali. 210 215 received no. 249 to 255 of paperbook. no. 256 to 257 of paperbook. no. no. page page 120 was Chetanbhai B. Shah. and at at amount submitted submitted 119 that no. Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in Notice u/s 133(6) was unserved and no response is received from There is no evidence that amount was received from Chetanbhai B. Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in There is no evidence that amount was received from Bhavnaben J. Notice u/s 133(6) was unserved and no response is received from Doshi & Vardhman Developers. absence of evidence. absence of evidence. depositor depositor Shah. 212213214- 209-210 250-253 112-113 117-118 119-120 215216 207 208 211 249 254 255 110 111 114 115 116 121 256 257 29 Account 2013-14 BOB Account 2013-14 (c) Bank Statement of Akhand Bank Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Syndicate Bank (a) Confirmation of Account(b) ITR of AY 2013-14(c) Passbook of Akhand Anand Co-op. Bank(d) Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Bank of India (d) Ledger Account in books of and Doshi Account (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (e) Repayment of Loan A/c. (b) Repayment of Loan A/c. Developers of Repayment of Loan A/c. of of of of of AY AY AY AY Co-op. J. Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Passbook of of of of Bhavnaben ITR ITR ITR ITR Vardhman Anand (b) (b) (b) (b) (a) (c) (a) (a) (a) (a) 17014 8803 8544 8137 6103 3773 600000 700000 525000 500000 225000 300000 Sumatilal Shah Malaviya HUF Dineshchandra Mukeshbhai B Maheshbhai Maheshbhai Jahdishbhai Devshibhai Nayanaben Mehulbhai Niteshbhai Nanjibhai Koladiya Bhansali Savaliya Shah 28 29 30 32 33 34 In the bank statement of the depositor at page no. 124 of paperbook, it is reflected that amount was received In the bank passbook of the depositor at page no. 129 of paperbook, it is reflected that amount was received In the bank statement of the depositor at page no. 139 of paperbook, it is reflected that amount was received In the bank passbook of the depositor of paperbook, it is reflected amount of Requisite details are submitted at page In the bank statement of the depositor at page no. 139 of paperbook, it is reflected that amount was received loan is earlier received in bank account. 134 from M/s. Radhe Corporation. from M/s. Radhe Corporation. from M/s. Radhe Corporation. no. 258 to 263 of paperbook. no. from Hasmukhbhai Mehta. page at submitted There is no evidence that amount was received from M/s. Radhe There is no evidence that amount was received from Hasmukhbhai There is no evidence that amount was received from M/s. Radhe Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in Notice u/s 133(6) was unserved and no response is received from There is no evidence that amount was received from M/s. Radhe absence of evidence. Corporation. Corporation. Corporation. depositor Mehta. 131132133- 128-129 138-139 260-261 134135 122 123 124 125 126 127 130 136 137 140 258 259 262 263 141 142 143 144 30 Account 2013-14 UBI Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Bank of India Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Bank of India (a) Confirmation of Account(b) ITR of AY 2013-14(c) Passbook of Bank of India(d) Repayment of Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Bank of India (d) Ledger Account in books of Shah Account 2013-14 UBI of of (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (e) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. of of of of of AY Statement AY AY AY AY Statement Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation of of of of of Bank Sushilaben Bank ITR ITR ITR ITR ITR Loan A/c. (b) (b) (b) (b) (b) (a) (c) (a) (a) (a) (a) (c) 3699 1825 7638 5733 5425 5918 250000 200000 525000 375000 400000 400000 Mohanlal Shah Pravinchandra Pravinbhai G Ranjitbhai V Rameshbhai Hasmukhlal Pari Gems Shah HUF Poojaben Padhiyar K Shah Mehta HUF 35 38 39 40 43 45 In the bank passbook of the depositor at page no. 148 of paperbook, it is reflected that amount was received In the bank passbook of the depositor of paperbook, it is reflected amount of No such amount is received from Ajay R. Salvi or Hitesh R. Shah.This amount is received from Vitragbhai Dharu, which is refleceted in the bank passbook of the depositor at page no. 153 of paperbook and ledger account of the depositor in the books of accounts Requisite details are submitted at page The ledger account of Shaileshbhai G. Goswami in the books of accounts of Rameshbhai L. Diyora is submitted at page no. 160 of paperbook, where it is reflected that amount has been paid to loan is earlier received in bank account. no. 264 to 268 of paperbook. no. Shaileshbhai G. Goswami. from Poojaben H. Mehta. of Vitragbhai D. Dharu. page at submitted There is no evidence that amount was received from Poojaben H. Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in There is no evidence that amount was received from Ajay R. Salvi Notice u/s 133(6) was unserved and no response is received from There is no evidence that amount was received from Rameshbhai absence of evidence. & Hitesh R. Shah. L. Diyora. depositor Mehta. 150151152- 153154155 147-148 219-220 266-267 158-159 145 146 149 217 218 221 264 265 268 156 157 160 161 31 Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Bank of India Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Bank of India (a) Confirmation of Account(b) ITR of AY 2013-14(c) Passbook of Bank of India(d) Ledger Account in books of Vitragbhai D. Dharu(e) Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Bank of India Account 2013-14 BOB (d) Ledger Account in books of Diyora (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (e) Repayment of Loan A/c. of Repayment of Loan A/c. of of of of AY AY AY AY L. Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Passbook of of of of Rameshbhai ITR ITR ITR ITR (b) (b) (b) (b) (a) (a) (a) (a) (c) 3144 2219 9752 8575 6658 250000 300000 350000 325000 250000 Sanjaybhai V. Nanalal Shah Kalpeshbhai Hasmukhlal Shaileshgiri Sangitaben Sanjaybhai Gulabgiri Goswami Sahilbhai Sanghavi Mehta Doshi HUF 46 47 49 50 51 In the bank passbook of the depositor of paperbook, it is reflected amount of In the bank passbook of the depositor of paperbook, it is reflected amount of In the bank passbook of the depositor at page no. 148 of paperbook, it is reflected that amount was received In the bank passbook of the depositor of paperbook, it is reflected amount of loan is earlier received in bank account. loan is earlier received in bank account. loan is earlier received in bank account. 225 230 170 from Rameshbhai M. Shah HUF. no. no. no. page page page at at at submitted submitted submitted - - - - Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in There is no evidence that amount was received from Rameshbhai Creditworthiness of the depositor is treated as unexplained in No observation of the AO No observation of the AO No observation of the AO No observation of the AO absence of evidence. absence of evidence. absence of evidence M. Shah HUF. 162163164- 224-225 229-230 169-170 165166 222 223 226 227 228 231 167 168 171 172 10 11 12 13 14 15 32 Account 2013-14 BOB Account 2013-14 BOB (a) Confirmation of Account(b) ITR of AY 2013-14(c) Passbook of Bank of India(d) Repayment of Account 2013-14 (c) Passbook of Bank of India Account Account Account (a) Confirmation of Account (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (d) Repayment of Loan A/c. (b) Repayment of Loan A/c. (b) Repayment of Loan A/c. (b) Repayment of Loan A/c. of of of of of of of of AY AY AY Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Confirmation Passbook Passbook of of of ITR ITR ITR Loan A/c. (b) (b) (b) (a) (c) (a) (c) (a) (a) (a) (a) 6158 4562 3995 8063 2,94,187 7089 0 0 0 675000 500000 300000 300000 1,72,25,000 250000 15000 10000 15000 Dhirajlal Dharu Manilal Mehta Alpesh Gami Ashokkumar Rameshbhai Champaklal Grand Total Sushilaben Pushpaben Vitragbhai Shilpaben Shantilal Naman Anita Shah Shah Shah 52 53 54 57 58 59 60 61 No observation of the AO No observation of the AO 18-23 16 17 24 25 33 Account 2013-14 (c) Bank Passbook and Ledger Account (b) Repayment of Loan A/c. of of AY Confirmation Confirmation of ITR Accounts (b) (a) (a) 5425 0 3,06,701 404883 10000 1,79,29,883 Pankajbhai R. Viral N. Patel Grand Total Shah 62 63

35 5.7 It is also a settled law that unless the assessee has discharged the burden u/s 68, the onus of proving that the lenders had no creditworthiness will not shift on the AO. However in the case of appellant it is seen that though the appellant had nol discharged its onus completely the AO had issued notices u/s 133(6) to 57 creditors and has analysed the details submitted by them and the details provided by the appellant in case of the creditors to whom the notices u/s 133(6) was returned unserved. The Ld. ARs are not justified in asserting that the appellant had discharged its onus and was not required to establish the source of fund in the hand of the lenders to advance loans to the appellant. No doubt the case laws relied by the appellant lay down the principles as to various components required for satisfaction of section 68 but with due respect to those case laws and the Ld. ARs, in my considered opinion, the appellant has failed to establish that the facts of those case laws are similar to the facts of the appellant as marshalled by the AO after analyzing the details received on enquiry u/s 133(6). I am of the considered view that having establish the identity, the appellant had to establish the creditworthiness of the creditors and if the same is not proved the loan transactions cannot be held genuine. Mere ratios of these cases cannot rescue the appellant unless the appellant proves that the AO is not objective in his non satisfaction and that the creditors had the capacity to give the alleged loans. In fact the appellant has not even contended that the lenders are persons of means and have capacity to given loans.

5.8 During the appeal proceedings vide letter dated 27/12/2017 to the appellant it was required that either the appellant produces the lenders before me for examination or I may refer the case to the AO before whom those lenders can be produced by the appellant because without establishing the creditworthiness of the lenders no relief to the appellant can be granted.

5.9 In response to the letter dated 27/12/2017 the Ld. ARs appeared on 15/01/2018 and again pointed out to various case laws wherein in essence it has been held that capacity of the creditor is proved when the amounts are received by the assessee by account payee cheques drawn from bank accounts of the creditors. But again with due respect to 36 those case laws the ratios do not protect the appellant as the creditors have neither enough incomes and capitals nor enough balances in their bank accounts on regular basis. The Ld. ARs have not mentioned based in the capita/income/balance in bank account, the lenders had financial capacity to give loans. It will not be wrong to say that the Ld. AR's submission is long in law and short on facts.”

Interest Repayment of Loan Amount of Utilization of Credited No. Name of Page loan added during funds received Date Amount depositor Nos. (Rs.) the year by depositors (Rs.) (Rs.) Copy of bank statement is 1 Amratbhai Patel 3,00,000 3,773 08-12-2014 3,08,987 - not received from depositor 37 Copy of bank statement is 2 Arihant Exports 5,50,000 6,818 18/04/2014 5,50,000 - not received from depositor Loan of Rs. 2,50,000 given to Nileshkumar Ashaben P. 3 2,50,000 3,144 05-01-2014 2,50,000 D Viradi on 310 Kubadiya 12-05-2014 by cheque no. 246709 Balance Ashvinbhai carried 4 5,00,000 8,137 23/06/2015 5,49,710 311-312 Nagjibhai forward in Vekariya savings bank account Copy of bank Bharatbhai statement is 5 3,00,000 2,219 08-12-2014 3,08,987 - Shantilal Doshi not received from depositor Loan of Rs. 7,00,000 given to Shantinath Birenbhai A 6 6,00,000 9,173 08-12-2014 6,17,976 Associates on 313 Sanghavi 13-08-2014 by cheque no. 030195 Copy of bank Chandrikaben K statement is 7 2,50,000 7,027 05-01-2014 2,50,000 - Doshi not received from depositor Copy of bank Chetanbhai J statement is 8 4,00,000 5,030 23/06/2015 4,39,767 - Shah not received from depositor Loan of Rs. 2,20,000 given to Rupalben on Chintan 9 2,00,000 5,671 23/06/2015 2,19,884 314-315 Prakashbhai Doshi 24-06-2015 by cheque no. 108888 Transferred Rs. 2,55,000 as Darshanaben loan on 10-07- 10 2,50,000 3,575 07-08-2014 2,55,215 316-317 Shah 2014 by cheque no. 007500 Copy of bank Deveshbhai M statement is 11 5,00,000 7,151 28/07/2014 5,13,204 - Shah not received from depositor 38 Loan of Rs. 3,00,000 given to Mukeshbhai 12 Gautam Gems 2,50,000 3,699 07-04-2014 2,55,215 B. Patel on 10- 318 07-2014 by cheque no. 029740 Copy of bank Ghanshyambhai statement is 13 2,50,000 3,144 09-02-2014 2,58,544 - G Rakholiya not received from depositor Copy of bank Ghanshyambhai statement is 14 5,00,000 14,178 09-02-2014 5,17,087 - V Kabariya not received from depositor Loan of Rs. 2,00,000 given to Upendra C Girishbhai L 15 2,00,000 2,712 08-12-2014 2,05,992 Shah on 16- 319 Vora 08-2014 by cheque no. 477031 Loan of Rs. 2,55,000 given to Upendra C Gitaben 16 2,50,000 1,849 08-12-2014 2,57,490 Shah on 16- 320-321 Jagabhai Patel 08-2014 by cheque no. 884776 Loan of Rs. 2,50,000 given Gomtiben to Riteshbhai 17 Jivrajbhai 2,50,000 7,027 28/07/2014 2,56,602 K Shah HUF 322-323 Chaudhary on 30-07-2014 by cheque no. 000027 Loan of Rs. 1,60,000 given to Upendra C Gomtiben 18 1,50,000 999 08-12-2014 1,54,494 324-325 Shah on 16- Bhurabhai Patel 08-2014 by cheque no. 043738 Loan of Rs. 2,00,000 given Harjibhai to Pritiben on 19 2,00,000 2,712 18/04/2014 2,00,000 Devrambhai 326-327 22-04-2014 by Patel cheque no. 000023 Balance Hetalben carried 20 5,25,000 7,767 28/07/2014 5,38,864 328-329 Mehulbhai forward in Dharu savings bank 39 account

Copy of bank Jagdishbhai D statement is 21 2,50,000 3,575 07-04-2014 2,55,215 - Padhiyar not received from depositor Copy of bank Jayshreeben K statement is 22 5,50,000 8,137 28/07/2014 5,64,525 - Sanghavi not received from depositor Copy of bank Jitendrabhai statement is 23 3,00,000 8,507 08-12-2014 3,08,987 - Himatlal Shah not received from depositor Loan of Rs. 3,00,000 given to Ashok B Kiranbhai 24 3,00,000 8,359 28/07/2014 3,07,922 Doshi on 30- 330-331 Dilipbhai Shah 07-2014 by cheque no. 000017 Loan of Rs. 3,75,000 given Laljibhai to NCPL 25 Devrambhai 3,50,000 9,407 18/04/2014 3,50,000 Developers on 332-333 Patel 23-04-2014 by cheque no. 000026 Loan of Rs. 3,25,000 given Mahendra to NCPL 26 Dhirubhai 3,00,000 8,063 18/04/2014 3,00,000 Developers on 334-335 Pipaliya 23-04-2014 by cheque no. 025427 Loan of Rs. 2,50,000 given Mahendra to Bhadresh 27 Shantilal Doshi 2,50,000 6,596 28/07/2014 2,56,602 Traders on 31- 336 HUF 07-2014 by cheque no. 015419 Withdrawal of Rs. 1,20,500 Maheshbhai on 03-09-2014 28 6,00,000 17,014 09-02-2014 6,20,506 337-338 Devshibhai and balance Koladiya carried forward 40 Transferred Rs. 7,00,100 as loan on 05-09- Maheshbhai N. 29 7,00,000 8,803 09-02-2014 7,23,923 339 Savaliya 2014 by cheque no. 001230 Copy of bank Mehulbhai statement is 30 5,25,000 8,544 08-12-2014 5,40,728 - Sumatilal Shah not received from depositor Transferred Rs. 9,50,025 as Mukeshbhai B loan on 24-06- 32 5,00,000 8,137 23/06/2015 5,49,710 340-341 Malaviya HUF 2015 by cheque no. 511691 Copy of bank Nayanaben statement is 33 2,25,000 6,103 23/06/2015 2,47,370 - Jahdishbhai not received Bhansali from depositor Copy of bank Niteshbhai D. statement is 34 3,00,000 3,773 23/06/2015 3,29,826 - Shah not received from depositor Copy of bank statement is 35 Pari Gems 2,50,000 3,699 07-04-2014 2,55,215 - not received from depositor Copy of bank Poojaben statement is 38 Hasmukhlal 2,00,000 1,825 05-01-2014 2,00,000 - not received Mehta from depositor Loan of Rs. 5,36,840 given Pravinchandra K to Mittal Gems 39 5,25,000 7,638 07-04-2014 5,35,952 342-343 Shah on 10-07-2014 by cheque no. 317976 Loan of Rs. 3,75,000 given to Nileshkumar Pravinbhai G 40 3,75,000 5,733 05-01-2014 3,75,000 344-345 D Viradi on Shah HUF 12-05-2014 by cheque no. 0149434 Transferred Rs. 1,00,000 as loan on 25-02- Rameshbhai 2013 by 43 4,00,000 5,425 05-01-2014 4,00,000 Mohanlal Shah 346-347 cheque no. HUF 228011 and Rs. 5,00,000 as loan on 25-02- 41 2013 by cheque no. 228013 Loan of Rs. 6,00,000 given Ranjitbhai V to Star Galaxy 45 4,00,000 5,918 07-04-2014 4,08,344 348 Padhiyar on 08-07-2014 by cheque no. 049465 Balance Sahilbhai carried 46 Hasmukhlal 2,50,000 3,144 05-01-2014 2,50,000 forward in 349 Mehta savings bank account Loan of Rs. 3,15,000 given Sangitaben to Upendra C 47 3,00,000 2,219 08-12-2014 3,08,987 350-351 Kalpeshbhai Shah on 16- Doshi 08-2014 by cheque no. 043032 Loan of Rs. 3,50,000 given Sanjaybhai to Bhadresh 49 3,50,000 9,752 28/07/2014 3,59,243 352 Nanalal Shah Traders on 30- HUF 07-2014 by cheque no. 000027 Loan of Rs. 3,50,000 given to Pinkiben S Sanjaybhai V. 50 3,25,000 8,575 28/07/2014 3,33,583 353-354 Mehta on 30- Sanghavi 07-2014 by cheque no. 880304 Transferred Rs. 2,70,000 as Shaileshgiri loan as 23-04- 51 2,50,000 6,658 18/04/2014 2,50,000 355-356 Gulabgiri 2014 by Goswami cheque no. 000016 Copy of bank Shantilal Manilal statement is 52 6,75,000 6,158 23/06/2015 7,42,108 - Mehta not received from depositor Copy of bank Shilpaben statement is 53 Champaklal 5,00,000 4,562 23/06/2015 5,49,710 - not received Shah from depositor Copy of bank Sushilaben statement is 54 3,00,000 3,995 05-01-2014 3,00,000 - Rameshbhai not received Shah from depositor 42 Loan of Rs. 3,30,000 given to NCPL Vitragbhai 57 3,00,000 8,063 18/04/2014 3,00,000 Developers on 357 Dhirajlal Dharu 23-04-2014 by cheque no. 000014 Loan of Rs. 2,50,000 given to Riteshbhai Pushpaben 58 2,50,000 7,089 28/07/2014 2,56,602 K. Shah HUF 358-359 Ashokkumar Shah on 28-07-2014 by cheque no. 000012 59 Anita Tatosaniya 10,000 0 18/06/2013 10,000 Repaid in cash - 60 Naman 15,000 0 30/09/2013 15,000 Repaid in cash - Cash Withdrawal of Pankajbhai R. Rs. 4,00,000 61 4,00,000 5,425 27/06/2014 4,00,000 360 Shah on 28-06-2014 by cheque no. 096397 52 Viral N Patel 10,000 0 31/08/2013 10,000 Repaid in cash - 1,79,10,000 3,06,701