Held, that neither any confirmation nor any evidence regarding the addition had been furnished and, as such, the identity, genuineness of the transactions and creditworthiness had not been proved. Therefore, the addition  made was justified.   Held, that all parties who had advanced different amounts had filed confirmed copies of account mentioning their permanent account numbers, addresses, affidavits duly attested and evidence of having filed their tax returns with cash summary which confirmed the transactions of the assessee, both with regard to the advance amount paid by each of the related concerns which was subsequently adjusted against the sales made to these four parties and on account of the deposit of cash by each one of them on various dates towards the housing loan of the assessee Such evidence had not been doubted by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the entries relating to the related parties in effect stood accepted. Held, that the three Hindu undivided families who had independent identities and were being assessed and carrying on business, had out of their independent sources made the cash deposits in the housing loan and they had furnished the necessary proof in respect of the amount deposited in the housing loan accounts of the assessee and, thus, the source of the source also stood justified. Merely because the parties were not co-borrowers, the addition made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre was not justified. (AY. 2017-18)