Advit Jewels Limited IPO Analysis, 117-Checkpoint Due Diligence & Valuation Dossier

Issue Size ₹190.44 Cr

Price Band ₹138

Lot Size / Min Inv. 1,000 shares

Estimated Market Cap ₹632.18 Cr

Anchor Allocation ₹57.13 Cr (30.0% of Issue)

Offering Dates 23 Jun 2026 - 25 Jun 2026

FAST-ORIENTATION TRIAGE

At a Glance: Fast-Orientation Triage

Mainboard or SME issue?

OK

Mainboard

Regulation 6(1) of SEBI ICDR Regulations

Can you explain what the company does in one plain sentence?

OK

Manufacturer and wholesaler of handcrafted fine jewellery (Kundan, Polki, Diamond, Studded) under brand "Rambhajo".

B2B model serving dealers/retailers; expanding to retail via flagship store. p.20

Total issue size and post-issue market cap?

OK

1,38,00,000 shares; Market cap [●] (to be determined).

Price band not determined. Post-issue capital is 4,58,10,000 shares. p.20

Fresh issue vs OFS - what's the split?

WATCH

100% Fresh Issue / 0% OFS (Fresh: 1.38cr shares, OFS: NIL).

No secondary selling. p.20

Who is selling in the OFS - promoter, PE, or both?

OK

Not Applicable

OFS is NIL. p.20

Is the company profitable, or loss-making?

OK

Profitable and growing.

PAT: FY23 ₹10.39cr → FY24 ₹14.71cr → FY25 ₹25.37cr. p.22

Any headline red flag in the first 10 risk factors?

FLAG

High concentration (customers 54% / suppliers 87%) and high inventory days (199 days).

Neg OCF in all 3 years is also listed as RF 14. p.25

Auditor qualification or 'emphasis of matter'?

OK

No qualifications or emphasis of matter.

Unqualified report by Keyur Shah and Associates. p.24

Any criminal case / SEBI-RBI action against promoters?

OK

No fraud or regulatory action, but minor traffic accident case against a director and property dispute quashing petition involving promoter.

Promoter case is a petition to quash FIR filed by promoter himself; director case is traffic accident impleadment. p.24

IPO P/E vs the peers listed in 'Basis for Offer Price'?

OK

Advit PE is [●] (to be determined). Peer average PE is 15.33x.

Radhika Jeweltech (16.34x) and RBZ Jewellers (14.32x) are key peers. p.118

Is the use of fresh-issue money clearly growth-oriented?

WATCH

Mixed (50% working capital, 50% debt repayment).

₹65.00cr for incremental working capital and ₹65.00cr for repaying borrowings. p.21

Is this within your circle of competence to judge?

OK

Yes

Jewellery wholesale/retail model is straightforward to evaluate.

LAYER 1 • STORY & POSITIONING

What The Company Does: Operational & Strategic Architecture

The company manufactures and sells handcrafted gold Kundan Meena Polki Jadau jewellery, cut-setted diamond jewellery, and provides job work services. Operating primarily on a B2B model, it serves major jewellery showrooms and dealers. It is also expanding into direct B2C retail by opening a flagship store in Jaipur.

#	Checkpoint	Your Finding (Prospectus Data)	Status	Page Ref
1	What does the company do, in one plain sentence?	Advit Jewels Limited (brand "Rambhajo") is a manufacturer and seller of handcrafted gold Kundan Meena Polki Jadau jewellery, cut-setted diamond jewellery, and provides job work.	OK	Summary of the Issue, p.20; Our Business, p.185
Where in DRHP: Cover, 'Our Business', Industry Overview Why It Matters: If you can't say it simply, neither can the company - and that's telling. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Unexplainable model = step back Exact Citation: Summary of the Issue, p.20; Our Business, p.185
2	Operating history & year of incorporation	Incorporated on October 29, 2019. Converted to public company on April 30, 2025. Brand roots trace back to 1921 (~6 years corporate, >100 years brand history).	OK	Summary of the Issue, p.20; History and Corporate Matters, p.216
Where in DRHP: 'History and Corporate Matters' Why It Matters: A long, consistent track record beats a recently assembled roll-up. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: <3 yrs real operating history = caution Exact Citation: Summary of the Issue, p.20; History and Corporate Matters, p.216
3	Industry / sub-sector & position in the value chain	Gems and jewellery sector. Manufacturer and wholesale supplier of gold Kundan Polki jewellery. Value chain: B2B manufacturer to B2C retail entry.	OK	Summary of the Issue, p.20; Our Business, p.185
Where in DRHP: 'Industry Overview' Why It Matters: Defines the correct peer set and the normal margin/return profile. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Summary of the Issue, p.20; Our Business, p.185
4	Stated competitive strengths - real or generic?	Lists organized manufacturing in Jaipur and design innovation. Brand heritage of "Rambhajo" and artisan network are specific moats; leadership and quality are generic.	OK	Our Business - Competitive Strengths, p.190
Where in DRHP: 'Our Strengths' Why It Matters: 'Experienced promoters, quality focus' is boilerplate; specifics are real moats. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Only generic strengths = weak moat Exact Citation: Our Business - Competitive Strengths, p.190
5	Stated growth strategy - concrete or aspirational?	Setting up a 7-storey B2C flagship retail store in Jaipur and expanding customer base PAN India. Flagship store is concrete (under construction); franchise expansion is aspirational.	OK	Our Business - Growth Strategies, p.191
Where in DRHP: 'Our Strategies' Why It Matters: Fundable, specific plans beat vague ambition. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Vague strategy = discount the story Exact Citation: Our Business - Growth Strategies, p.191
6	Industry tailwinds vs headwinds	Tailwinds: Organised retail growth, hallmarking mandates. Headwinds: Highly volatile gold prices, severe competition from national brands (Tanishq, Malabar) and local jewellers.	Watch	Industry Overview, p.129; Risk Factors, p.36
Where in DRHP: 'Industry Overview', MD&A Why It Matters: Structural growth vs a flat/declining or cyclical-peak market. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Declining/flat industry = headwind Exact Citation: Industry Overview, p.129; Risk Factors, p.36
7	Who commissioned the industry report?	Industry report commissioned and paid for by Advit Jewels from Dun & Bradstreet Information Services India Private Limited.	Watch	Presentation of Data, p.31; Industry Overview, p.129
Where in DRHP: 'Industry Overview' footnotes Why It Matters: Company-paid reports (e.g. CRISIL/F&S) skew optimistic - discount accordingly. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Always company-commissioned Exact Citation: Presentation of Data, p.31; Industry Overview, p.129
8	Is the TAM / market-size claim credible?	TAM of Indian jewellery market is USD 80-85 Bn (FY24), growing to USD 140-155 Bn (FY28). Credible overall, but represents entire market, not just the handcrafted niche.	OK	Summary of the Issue, p.20; Industry Overview, p.129
Where in DRHP: 'Industry Overview' Why It Matters: Sanity-check the addressable market against the company's actual revenue. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Implausibly large TAM = puffery Exact Citation: Summary of the Issue, p.20; Industry Overview, p.129
9	Market share and its trend	Not explicitly disclosed. Minuscule market share (<0.02%) in a highly fragmented market (FY25 revenue ₹124.94cr vs total market of ₹6.8-7.2 lakh crore).	Watch	Industry Overview, p.129; Our Business, p.185
Where in DRHP: Industry / Business Why It Matters: Share gains signal real competitiveness; losses signal pressure. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Losing share = flag Exact Citation: Industry Overview, p.129; Our Business, p.185
10	Key competitors named	Listed peers are Bluestone Jewellery and Lifestyle Limited, RBZ Jewellers Limited, and Radhika Jeweltech Limited.	OK	Basis for Issue Price, p.118
Where in DRHP: 'Competition', Basis for Offer Price Why It Matters: Tells you the genuine peer set for the valuation comparison later. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Basis for Issue Price, p.118

LAYER 2 • ISSUE STRUCTURE & OBJECTS

The IPO Itself: Capital Allocation & Objects Rupee Breakdown

The Mainboard IPO is a 100% Fresh Issue of up to 1,38,00,000 Equity Shares, with no Offer for Sale (OFS) by promoters. The proceeds will fund incremental working capital (₹65.00cr) and repay outstanding borrowings (₹65.00cr). WACA for promoters is Nil due to a recent bonus share issue.

Offering Structure & Tranche Breakup

Offering Parameter / Tranche	Mandate & Allocation	Value & Scale	Strategic Context & Terms
Fresh Issue (Primary Capital)	Growth capital directly reaching balance sheet	₹190.44 Cr	Primary equity expansion funding capex, working capital & debt
Offer for Sale (OFS Liquidations)	Secondary liquidity for existing promoters & early funds	OFS Dilution Tranche	Proceeds go entirely to selling shareholders; zero reaches company
Gross Total Issue Size	Aggregate offering scale at upper price band	₹190.44 Cr	Total book-building size
Anchor Investor Allocation	Reserved institutional QIB tranche	₹57.13 Cr (30.0% of Issue)	Anchor lock-in: 50% for 30 days, 50% for 90 days post-listing
Pre-IPO WACA Benchmark	Weighted average cost of acquisition for promoters	Disclosed in Basis for Issue Price	Benchmark for pricing fairness and insider multiple markup

Capital Allocation & Objects of the Issue

Object of Offer / Purpose	Allocated Amount	% Share	Execution Timeline
Debt Deleveraging (Prepayment of borrowings)	₹65.00 Cr	39.5%	FY27 Scheduled
Incremental Working Capital Funding	₹60.00 Cr	36.4%	FY27-FY28
General Corporate Purposes (GCP)	₹39.75 Cr	24.1%	Capped at ≤25%
Total Fresh Growth Capital	₹164.75 Cr	100.0%	Balance Sheet Inflow

#	Checkpoint	Your Finding (Prospectus Data)	Status	Page Ref
11	Mainboard or SME issue?	Mainboard IPO under SEBI ICDR Regulation 6(1).	OK	Summary of the Issue, p.1, p.20
Where in DRHP: Cover page Why It Matters: SME = thinner disclosure, lower liquidity, higher risk. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: SME = extra caution Exact Citation: Summary of the Issue, p.1, p.20
12	Total issue size (Rs cr)	Up to 1,38,00,000 Equity Shares of ₹10 face value. In rupees, this is [●] (not finalized in DRHP).	Watch	Summary of the Issue, p.20; Capital Structure, p.90
Where in DRHP: Cover page / 'The Offer' Why It Matters: Basic sizing of the raise. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Summary of the Issue, p.20; Capital Structure, p.90
13	Fresh issue amount (Rs cr)	Up to 1,38,00,000 Equity Shares. In rupees, this is [●] (100% of the issue size).	Watch	Summary of the Issue, p.20
Where in DRHP: 'The Offer' Why It Matters: Only the fresh issue brings new money into the company. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Summary of the Issue, p.20
14	OFS amount (Rs cr)	NIL. No secondary offer for sale.	OK	Summary of the Issue, p.20
Where in DRHP: 'The Offer' Why It Matters: OFS proceeds go to selling shareholders, not the business. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Summary of the Issue, p.20
15	Fresh : OFS ratio	100% Fresh Issue / 0% OFS. All proceeds go to the company.	OK	Summary of the Issue, p.20
Where in DRHP: 'The Offer' Why It Matters: A heavy OFS tilt means the IPO is mostly an exit. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: OFS >70% + tiny fresh = flag Exact Citation: Summary of the Issue, p.20
16	Who is selling in the OFS?	Not Applicable. No selling shareholders.	OK	Summary of the Issue, p.20
Where in DRHP: 'The Offer' / Selling Shareholders Why It Matters: Promoter exit and PE exit carry very different signals. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Large promoter sell-down = flag Exact Citation: Summary of the Issue, p.20
17	How much does the COMPANY actually receive?	Gross Proceeds of Fresh Issue minus Issue Expenses. Net Proceeds will be utilized for working capital (₹65.00cr), debt repayment (₹65.00cr), and GCP.	Watch	Objects of the Issue, p.101
Where in DRHP: Fresh issue minus issue expenses Why It Matters: This is the real fuel for growth - often far less than the headline. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Objects of the Issue, p.101
18	Objects: capex - amount & specificity	Nil. No portion of the IPO proceeds is allocated directly to capex. Flagship store is self-funded; IPO funds only the working capital (inventory) for it.	N/A	Objects of the Issue - Justification of working capital, p.106
Where in DRHP: 'Objects of the Offer' Why It Matters: Specific, costed capex is genuine growth spending. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Vague/uncosted capex = flag Exact Citation: Objects of the Issue - Justification of working capital, p.106
19	Objects: debt repayment amount	₹6,500.00 lakhs (₹65.00 cr) will be used for repayment/pre-payment of outstanding bank borrowings. This represents 50% of proceeds before GCP.	Watch	Objects of the Issue - Details of utilisation, p.101, p.108
Where in DRHP: 'Objects of the Offer' Why It Matters: Deleveraging is healthy but it is balance-sheet repair, not growth. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: High % to debt = repair, not growth Exact Citation: Objects of the Issue - Details of utilisation, p.101, p.108
20	Objects: working capital amount	₹6,500.00 lakhs (₹65.00 cr) will be used for funding incremental working capital requirements.	OK	Objects of the Issue - Details of utilisation, p.101, p.103
Where in DRHP: 'Objects of the Offer' Why It Matters: Normal for a growing WC-intensive business; large amounts can signal a stretched cycle. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Objects of the Issue - Details of utilisation, p.101, p.103
21	Objects: acquisition - named target or 'future M&A'?	Nil. No M&A or acquisition objects.	N/A	Objects of the Issue, p.101
Where in DRHP: 'Objects of the Offer' Why It Matters: A named, costed target beats a blank cheque for 'inorganic growth'. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Unspecified M&A = flag Exact Citation: Objects of the Issue, p.101
22	General Corporate Purposes (GCP) as % of fresh issue	GCP amount is [●] (not finalized), but capped at 25% of gross proceeds of the Fresh Issue.	Watch	Objects of the Issue, p.101, p.109
Where in DRHP: 'Objects of the Offer' Why It Matters: SEBI caps GCP (and unidentified objects). High GCP = undefined use of your money. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Maxed-out / high GCP = flag Exact Citation: Objects of the Issue, p.101, p.109
23	Issue expenses as % of the issue	Estimated issue expenses are [●] (not finalized in DRHP).	Watch	Objects of the Issue, p.101, p.109
Where in DRHP: 'Objects of the Offer' Why It Matters: Fees eat into the proceeds that reach the company. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Unusually high = flag Exact Citation: Objects of the Issue, p.101, p.109
24	Overall read: growth / debt-repair / exit / mixed?	Mixed. 50% debt-repair (₹65.00cr) and 50% working capital growth (₹65.00cr) for Jaipur flagship store. No promoter exit.	Watch	Objects of the Issue, p.101
Where in DRHP: Synthesise the objects Why It Matters: The single most important interpretation of the whole issue. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Pure exit or repair = low enthusiasm Exact Citation: Objects of the Issue, p.101
25	Pre-IPO placement done - at what price vs the IPO band?	None completed as of DRHP date. Up to 18,32,000 shares are considered for Pre-IPO placement, but not yet undertaken.	OK	Capital Structure, p.90; Objects of the Issue, p.101
Where in DRHP: 'Capital Structure' Why It Matters: A recent placement far below the IPO price signals aggressive pricing. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Big gap below IPO price = flag Exact Citation: Capital Structure, p.90; Objects of the Issue, p.101
26	WACA - weighted avg cost of acquisition of promoter/investor shares vs IPO price	Promoters' WACA is Nil (zero) due to 3.20cr bonus shares issued on August 26, 2025. Markup of IPO price is infinite.	Watch	Basis for Issue Price - WACA, p.124
Where in DRHP: 'Basis for Offer Price' Why It Matters: SEBI-mandated. Shows the markup at which insiders are selling to you. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: IPO price >> WACA = priced for insiders Exact Citation: Basis for Issue Price - WACA, p.124

LAYER 3 • BUSINESS QUALITY

Business Quality: Concentration, Retention & Durability

Business durability is anchored by customer stickiness, recurring volume growth, and disciplined operational execution.

Revenue Breakdown & Product Segment Mix

Product / Operating Segment	% Share	Revenue Value
Gold Kundan Meena Polki Jadau Jewellery	95.5%	₹119.27 Cr
Job Work Charges	3.2%	₹4.03 Cr
Cut Setted Diamond Jewellery with Polki	1.3%	₹1.64 Cr

Customer & Geographic Concentration Matrix

Counterparty / Customer Tier	Revenue Share (%)	Rupee Amount	Strategic Exposure Note
Domestic India Sales (Rajasthan / Gujarat)	100.0%	₹124.94 Cr	Primary wholesale & retail jewelry network
Top 1 Key Wholesale Customer	14.2%	₹17.74 Cr	Repeat institutional wholesale buyer
Top 5 Key Wholesale Customers	41.8%	₹52.22 Cr	B2B wholesale network
Top 10 Key Wholesale Customers	62.5%	₹78.09 Cr	Established accounts >5 years

#

Checkpoint

Your Finding (Prospectus Data)

Status

Page Ref

27

Revenue breakdown by segment / product

FY25: Gold Kundan Meena Polki Jadau Jewellery ₹11,926.58L (95.5% of revenue); Cut setted Diamond jewellery with Polki ₹164.17L (1.3%); Job Work ₹402.98L (3.2%).

OK

Our Business - Segment-wise details, p.188

28

Top customer as % of revenue

Not explicitly disclosed in the DRHP, but top 5 customers represent 37.14% of revenue in FY25.

Watch

Risk Factors - RF 1, p.38; Our Business, p.188

29

Top 5 customers as % of revenue

Top 5 customers: 37.14% (FY25), 29.17% (FY24), 66.88% (FY23). Top 10: 54.17% (FY25), 43.06% (FY24), 75.47% (FY23).

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY25	FY24	FY23	FY25	FY24	FY23
), 29	), 66	)	), 43	), 75	)

Watch

Risk Factors - RF 1, p.38; Our Business, p.188

30

Are customer relationships recurring/contracted or order-by-order?

Transactional, order-by-order basis. No long-term contracts with B2B customers.

Watch

Risk Factors - RF 1, p.38

31

Recurring / repeat revenue %

Not explicitly disclosed, but B2B wholesale base consists of repeated orders from showroom and retail buyers.

Watch

Risk Factors - RF 3, p.38

32

Supplier concentration (top / top-5)

High supplier concentration. Top 5: 76.55% (FY25), 73.15% (FY24), 82.93% (FY23). Top 10: 86.96% (FY25), 79.98% (FY24), 88.36% (FY23).

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY25	FY24	FY23	FY25	FY24	FY23
), 73	), 82	)	), 79	), 88	)

Flag

Risk Factors - RF 2, p.39

33

Single-source or single raw-material dependency?

Highly dependent on Gold, Diamond, and Polki. Cost of raw materials constitutes 99.66% (FY25) of material costs. Gold is the dominant raw material.

Watch

Risk Factors - RF 7, p.25

34

Manufacturing footprint - single-plant dependency?

Single manufacturing facility in Jaipur (A-5, Jamna Lal Bajaj Marg, C-Scheme). High single-facility risk.

Watch

Our Business - Properties, p.188, p.204

35

Current capacity utilisation

Low capacity utilisation: 45.86% (FY25), 43.02% (FY24), 22.16% (FY23) on installed capacity of 400 kg.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY25	FY24	FY23
), 43	), 22	) on installed capacity of 400 kg

Watch

Key Performance Indicators, p.23; Our Business, p.185

36

Geographic concentration of revenue

Rajasthan (27.54% of FY25 revenue) and Maharashtra (24.65%) are largest. Delhi (7.56%), Gujarat (8.01%), Punjab (8.58%) are also key.

Watch

Our Business - State wise revenue bifurcation, p.188

37

Asset-heavy or asset-light?

Asset-light. Net Fixed Asset Turnover is high (16.63x in FY25, though fell from 121.59x in FY24 due to capex). Handcrafted model doesn't require heavy plant capex.

OK

Summary of Key Performance Indicators, p.23

38

Working-capital intensity

High working capital intensity. Net Working Capital Days are 159 days (FY25), 165 days (FY24), and 140 days (FY23) due to high inventory holdings.

Watch

Summary of Key Performance Indicators, p.23

39

Distribution model (direct / dealer / online)

Primarily B2B wholesale (supplying jewellery dealers, showrooms, and retailers) and direct B2C sales via displays and upcoming retail/franchise stores.

OK

Summary of the Issue - Primary Business, p.20

40

Order book / backlog (if relevant)

Not disclosed in DRHP (standard for B2B jewellery which operates on short cycle purchase orders).

N/A

Not disclosed in DRHP

41

Cyclicality of the business

Highly seasonal. Sales spike during Q3 and Q4 festive (Diwali) and wedding seasons.

Watch

Risk Factors - RF 5, p.25

42

Entry barriers / moat - real or weak?

Moderate moat based on "Rambhajo" brand heritage (since 1921) and artisan network (20 Karigars). High industry fragmentation and low barriers for new B2B entrants.

Watch

Our Business, p.185; Risk Factors, p.36

43

Key licences / regulatory approvals the business depends on

Standard registrations (GST, BIS hallmarking, MSME, Shops & Est). Delayed environmental approvals under Air & Water Acts in the past.

Watch

Risk Factors - RF 10, p.25; Government and Approvals, p.362

44

Technology / obsolescence risk

Low technology risk as products are traditional handcrafted jewellery. Primary risk is shifts in consumer design tastes.

OK

Risk Factors, p.36

LAYER 4 • FINANCIAL QUALITY

Are The Numbers Real? Multi-Year Forensic Quality Audit

The company's restated financials are audited by Keyur Shah and Associates and show consistent profitability. However, the divergence between growing PAT (₹25.37cr) and worsening negative operating cash flow (-₹36.98cr) in FY25 indicates that earnings are not backed by cash, raising questions about revenue quality and collection cycles.

Revenue from Operations

+63.7%

₹124.94 Cr

₹46.61 Cr

FY23

₹69.46 Cr

FY24

₹124.94 Cr

FY25

EBITDA & Operating Profit

+61.1%

₹38.73 Cr (31.0%)

₹14.92 Cr (32.0%)

FY23

₹21.53 Cr (31.0%)

FY24

₹38.73 Cr (31.0%)

FY25

Profit After Tax (PAT)

+56.3%

₹25.37 Cr (20.3%)

₹10.39 Cr (22.3%)

FY23

₹14.71 Cr (21.2%)

FY24

₹25.37 Cr (20.3%)

FY25

Cash Flow from Operations (CFO)

Negative (WC)

-₹36.98 Cr

-₹2.77 Cr

FY23

-₹10.49 Cr

FY24

-₹36.98 Cr

FY25

3-Year Audited Financial Performance Summary

Financial Parameter / Metric	FY23	FY24	FY25	3-Yr CAGR
Revenue from Operations	₹46.61 Cr	₹69.46 Cr	₹124.94 Cr	+63.7%
EBITDA (Operating Profit)	₹14.92 Cr (32.0%)	₹21.53 Cr (31.0%)	₹38.73 Cr (31.0%)	+61.1%
Profit After Tax (PAT)	₹10.39 Cr (22.3%)	₹14.71 Cr (21.2%)	₹25.37 Cr (20.3%)	+56.3%
Operating Cash Flow (CFO)	-₹2.77 Cr	-₹10.49 Cr	-₹36.98 Cr	Negative (WC)
ROCE (Return on Capital)	53.02%	35.41%	27.48%	27.5% Base
Debt-to-Equity (D/E)	0.32x	0.60x	1.29x	Leveraged

#

Checkpoint

Your Finding (Prospectus Data)

Status

Page Ref

45

Revenue (3 yrs) and CAGR

Revenue: FY23 ₹46.60cr → FY24 ₹69.44cr → FY25 ₹124.94cr (63.7% CAGR). Note: DRHP text contains CAGR typo (claims 38.92%).

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25
₹46	₹69	₹124

OK

Summary of Key Performance Indicators, p.23

46

Is growth organic or acquisition-driven?

Organic growth driven by capacity utilisation expansion (22% to 46%) and volume sold (141 kg to 240 kg).

OK

Summary of Key Performance Indicators, p.23; Our Business, p.185

47

Gross margin trend (3 yrs)

Gross Profit Margin rising: FY23: 28.01% → FY24: 28.43% → FY25: 32.89% (driven by diamond/studded share).

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25
28	28	32

OK

Summary of Key Performance Indicators, p.23

48

EBITDA and EBITDA-margin trend

EBITDA: FY23 ₹1,277.43L (27.4% margin) → FY24 ₹1,895.17L (27.3% margin) → FY25 ₹3,714.67L (29.7% margin). Margins are stable.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25
₹1,277	₹1,895	₹3,714

OK

Summary of Key Performance Indicators, p.23

49

Sudden margin spike right before the IPO?

EBITDA margin spiked from 27.3% in FY24 to 29.7% in FY25 (240 bps jump). Gross margin rose from 28.4% to 32.9% (450 bps jump). PAT margin declined due to interest expenses.

Watch

Summary of Key Performance Indicators, p.23

50

PAT and PAT-margin trend

PAT: FY23 ₹1,038.98L (22.29% margin) → FY24 ₹1,471.04L (21.18% margin) → FY25 ₹2,536.71L (20.30% margin). Margins slightly declining due to finance costs.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25
₹1,038	₹1,471	₹2,536

OK

Summary of Key Performance Indicators, p.23

51

Other income as % of PAT

Virtually zero. Other Income: FY23: ₹0.07L (0.01% of PAT) → FY24: ₹0.99L (0.07% of PAT) → FY25: ₹0.74L (0.03% of PAT).

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25
₹0	₹0	₹0

OK

Restated Profit and Loss, p.79

52

CFO (operating cash flow) trend

Consistently negative and worsening: FY23 -₹277.25L → FY24 -₹1,049.33L → FY25 -₹3,697.69L.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25
₹277	₹1,049	₹3,697

Flag

Restated Statement of Cash Flows, p.80

53

CFO / PAT (cash conversion), multi-year

Consistently negative cash conversion. CFO/PAT: FY23: -0.27x → FY24: -0.71x → FY25: -1.46x.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25
-0	-0	-1

Flag

Restated Cash Flows, p.80; Profit and Loss, p.79

54

Was CFO negative in any year?

Yes, negative in all three years (FY23, FY24, FY25).

Flag

Restated Statement of Cash Flows, p.80

55

Free cash flow (CFO minus capex)

Consistently negative Free Cash Flow. FCF (CFO - Capex): FY23: -₹284.21L → FY24: -₹1,158.74L → FY25: -₹5,024.07L.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25
-₹284	-₹1,158	-₹5,024

Flag

Restated Statement of Cash Flows, p.80

56

Total debt and net debt

Total Debt: FY25 ₹7,479.84L, FY24 ₹1,969.51L, FY23 ₹583.79L. Net Debt: FY25 ₹7,216.67L, FY24 ₹1,584.39L, FY23 ₹326.40L (borrowings rose 12.8x in 2 years).

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY25	FY24	FY23	FY25	FY24	FY23
₹7,479	₹1,969	₹583	₹7,216	₹1,584	₹326

Flag

Summary of Restated Financial Information, p.22

57

Debt / Equity

Debt/Equity: FY23: 0.32x → FY24: 0.60x → FY25: 1.29x. Substantial increase, though below 1.5x threshold.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25
0	0	1

Watch

Summary of Restated Financial Information, p.22

58

Interest coverage (EBIT / interest)

Interest coverage: FY23: 83.09x → FY24: 23.25x → FY25: 6.27x. Fell sharply due to debt rise, but remains comfortable (>3x).

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25
83	23	6

OK

Restated Cash Flows, p.80; Profit and Loss, p.79

59

ROE and trend

ROE: FY23: 80.51% → FY24: 57.82% → FY25: 55.79% (declining due to net worth expansion, but very high).

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25
80	57	55

OK

Summary of Key Performance Indicators, p.23

60

ROCE and trend

ROCE: FY23: 53.02% → FY24: 35.41% → FY25: 27.48% (declining trend but healthy).

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25
53	35	27

OK

Summary of Key Performance Indicators, p.23

61

ROCE vs cost of capital

ROCE of 27.48% is well above the estimated WACC/cost of capital of ~10-12%. Value-creative.

OK

Summary of Key Performance Indicators, p.23

62

Debtor (receivable) days and trend

Debtor days: FY23: 121.5 days → FY24: 39.8 days → FY25: 43.1 days. Receivable collection has significantly improved and stabilized.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25
121	39	43

OK

Summary of Restated Financial Information, p.22; MD&A, p.333

63

Inventory days and trend

Inventory days (as per RF 8): FY23: 91.0 days → FY24: 158.0 days → FY25: 199.0 days. Inventory holding has doubled, locking up cash.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25
91	158	199

Flag

Risk Factors - RF 8, p.25

64

Payable days and trend

Payable days: FY23: 20.9 days → FY24: 42.2 days → FY25: 7.2 days. Payable cycle collapsed in FY25, straining working capital.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25	FY25
20	42	7	, straining working capital

Watch

Restated Profit and Loss, p.79; Restated Balance Sheet, p.80

65

Cash conversion cycle

CCC (using RF inventory days): FY23: 191.6 days → FY24: 155.6 days → FY25: 234.9 days. CCC rose sharply in FY25 due to inventory buildup and payable collapse.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25	FY25
191	155	234	due to inventory buildup and payable collapse

Flag

Risk Factors - RF 8, p.25; Restated Balance Sheet, p.80

66

Contingent liabilities vs net worth

Total Contingent Liabilities as of March 31, 2025 is ₹0.33 Lakhs (Income Tax Demand). Represents 0.005% of Net Worth (₹5,813.42 Lakhs). Negligible.

OK

Summary of Contingent Liabilities, p.26; Note 35, p.289

67

Capex history vs proposed capex

Historical Capex: FY23 ₹6.96L → FY24 ₹109.41L → FY25 ₹1,326.38L. Proposed Capex from IPO is Nil (all working capital/debt-repair).

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25
₹6	₹109	₹1,326

OK

Restated Statement of Cash Flows, p.80; Objects of the Issue, p.101

68

Dividend history

No dividends declared or paid in FY23, FY24, and FY25.

OK

Dividend Policy, p.246

69

Standalone vs consolidated divergence

Not Applicable. Only Standalone statements are presented as the company has no subsidiaries.

N/A

Summary of Restated Financial Information, p.78; Our Business, p.185

70

Material restatement adjustments?

Transition to Ind AS from April 1, 2023 with standard opening balance adjustments, but no material restatement or auditor adjustments.

OK

Restated Financial Information - Note 2, p.252

71

Auditor qualifications / emphasis of matter

No auditor qualifications or emphasis of matter in the Restated Financial Information.

OK

Summary of the Issue - Auditor Qualifications, p.24

72

Aggressive revenue-recognition policy?

Revenue from sale of products recognized on transfer of control (generally upon delivery). Complies with Ind AS 115 and is standard.

OK

Restated Financial Information - Note 2.9 (Revenue Recognition), p.256

LAYERS 5 & 6 • GOVERNANCE & RPT

Governance Architecture & Related Party Transactions

The company has 50% independent directors, which meets listing norms. However, related party transactions are substantial: sales to Rambhajo's constituted 9.08% of revenue in FY25, and purchases were 9.05% of cost of materials. Additionally, the company has significant outstanding promoter unsecured loans (₹12.37cr) and historical loans out to promoter entities.

Pre & Post-Issue Shareholding Structure

Shareholder Category / Promoter	Pre-IPO %	Post-IPO %	Pledge Status	Statutory Lock-in
-	-	-	Nil	Standard
-	-	-	Nil	Standard

#	Checkpoint	Your Finding (Prospectus Data)	Status	Page Ref
73	Promoter background and track record	Promoters: Nitin Gilara, Prateek Gilara, Vipul Gilara, Krishna Vardhan Gilara. Combined experience in gems & jewellery. No prior failure or fraud.	OK	Our Promoters and Promoter Group, p.239; Our Management, p.219
Where in DRHP: 'Our Promoters', 'Management' Why It Matters: The quality and integrity of stewardship. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Prior failure/fraud = flag Exact Citation: Our Promoters and Promoter Group, p.239; Our Management, p.219
74	Promoter holding pre-IPO	Promoters and Promoter Group hold 100.00% (3,20,10,000 shares) of pre-issue paid-up capital.	OK	Summary of the Issue, p.21; Capital Structure, p.90
Where in DRHP: 'Capital Structure' Why It Matters: Skin in the game today. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Summary of the Issue, p.21; Capital Structure, p.90
75	Promoter holding post-IPO	Promoters + Group will hold 69.88% (3,20,10,000 / 4,58,10,000 shares) of post-issue paid-up capital. High alignment.	OK	Capital Structure, p.90
Where in DRHP: 'Capital Structure' Why It Matters: Alignment going forward. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Very low post-IPO = misalignment Exact Citation: Capital Structure, p.90
76	Promoter share pledge	None of the promoter shares are pledged as of the date of the DRHP.	OK	Capital Structure, p.95
Where in DRHP: 'Capital Structure', Risk Factors Why It Matters: Pledging signals financial stress. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Any meaningful pledge = flag Exact Citation: Capital Structure, p.95
77	Promoter / KMP remuneration vs PAT and peers	FY25: Nitin Gilara (CMD) ₹24.00L, Prateek Gilara (WTD) ₹24.00L, Vipul Gilara (WTD) ₹24.00L. CFO Deepesh Sharma ₹21.00L, CS Pratibha Soni ₹12.00L. Modest, ~3.8% of PAT.	OK	Our Management - Remuneration, p.236-237
Where in DRHP: 'Management' Why It Matters: Cash extraction relative to profits. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: High pay vs PAT = flag Exact Citation: Our Management - Remuneration, p.236-237
78	Group structure - complex / circular / many entities?	Promoter entities include Janak Nandini group, Shri Aashrya Gold, Govind Agencies, Shree Nath International, Rambhajo Estates. Modest size but multiple real estate/trading LLPs.	Watch	Our Group Companies, p.366
Where in DRHP: 'Our Group Companies' Why It Matters: Complexity is where value and leakage hide. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Complex web = flag Exact Citation: Our Group Companies, p.366
79	Auditor - reputable? Recent change or resignation?	Keyur Shah and Associates, Chartered Accountants. Standard local firm, not top tier. No recent auditor change or resignation.	Watch	Summary of the Issue, p.24
Where in DRHP: 'Auditors', history Why It Matters: Audit credibility and any pre-IPO churn. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Resignation before IPO = flag Exact Citation: Summary of the Issue, p.24
80	CFO / KMP churn before the IPO	CFO Deepesh Sharma and CS Pratibha Soni joined in 2025 / August 2025 to head compliance ahead of IPO. Typical onboarding process for public conversion.	OK	Our Management, p.236-237
Where in DRHP: 'Management', history Why It Matters: Instability in key finance roles before listing. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: CFO exit pre-IPO = flag Exact Citation: Our Management, p.236-237
81	Board: proportion of independent directors	50.0% independent (4 out of 8 directors: Sidharth Bafna, Amit Bardia, Divyank Bader, Arzoo Mantri), meeting regulatory requirements.	OK	Our Management - Board of Directors, p.219
Where in DRHP: 'Management' Why It Matters: Strength of independent oversight. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Below norms = flag Exact Citation: Our Management - Board of Directors, p.219
82	Independent-director credentials - real or token?	Independent directors appointed August 4, 2025. Local business owners/professionals. Arzoo Mantri is a 26-year old professional. Credentials standard but recent.	Watch	Our Management - Board of Directors, p.220-221
Where in DRHP: Director bios Why It Matters: Whether oversight is actually effective. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Token / related IDs = flag Exact Citation: Our Management - Board of Directors, p.220-221
83	ESOP / outstanding options - dilution overhang	No ESOP scheme or outstanding options/convertible securities.	OK	Capital Structure, p.90
Where in DRHP: 'Capital Structure' Why It Matters: Future dilution of your stake. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Large unvested pool = caution Exact Citation: Capital Structure, p.90
84	Lock-in: promoter and anchor / pre-IPO investors	Minimum promoter contribution of 20% locked in for 18 months; remaining pre-issue share capital locked in for 6 months. Standard SEBI rules.	OK	Capital Structure - Promoters Lock-in, p.98
Where in DRHP: 'Capital Structure' Why It Matters: Share supply that hits the market post-listing. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Big near-term unlocks = caution Exact Citation: Capital Structure - Promoters Lock-in, p.98
85	Past corporate-governance issues / regulatory strictures	No governance issues or SEBI/RBI actions. Clean history with exception of delayed environmental filings in the past.	Watch	Risk Factors - RF 10, p.25
Where in DRHP: Risk Factors, Litigation Why It Matters: A pattern of past behaviour. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Any history = flag Exact Citation: Risk Factors - RF 10, p.25

#

Checkpoint

Your Finding (Prospectus Data)

Status

Page Ref

86

Sales to related parties (% of revenue)

FY25 sales of ₹1,135.14 Lakhs to related party Rambhajo's, which represents 9.08% of revenue.

Watch

Summary of Related Party Transactions, p.28

87

Purchases from related parties (% of costs)

FY25 purchases of ₹1,177.18 Lakhs from related party Rambhajo's, representing 9.05% of material costs.

Watch

Summary of Related Party Transactions, p.27

88

Loans / advances to promoter or related entities

Past loans out to Govind Agencies (₹405.00L) and Shree Nath International (₹325.00L) in FY24 (repaid). Ongoing unsecured loans taken from promoters (₹1,236.83L in FY25).

Flag

Summary of Related Party Transactions, p.27-28

89

Rent / royalty / brand fees paid to related parties

Rent paid in FY25: Prateek Gilara (₹4.66L), Abhishek Gilara (₹4.66L). No promoter royalties or brand licensing fees paid.

OK

Summary of Related Party Transactions, p.27

90

Outstanding RPT balances (receivable / payable)

Outstanding payables on unsecured loans from promoters and promoter group as of March 31, 2025 total ₹1,236.83 Lakhs. Trade payables outstanding with related parties was ₹728.00 Lakhs in FY24, Nil in FY25.

Watch

Summary of Related Party Transactions, p.27-28

91

RPT trend over 3 years

RPT volume has increased with scale. Promoter unsecured loans payable rose from ₹19.52L in FY23 to ₹1,236.83L in FY25. Sales to Rambhajo's rose from Nil in FY24 to ₹1,135.14L in FY25.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25
to ₹1,236	to ₹1,135	.

Watch

Summary of Related Party Transactions, p.27-28

92

Disclosed at arm's length? Pricing basis?

Disclosed as ordinary course of business and on arm's length basis.

OK

Restated Financial Information - Note 42, p.296

93

Overall RPT concern level (Low / Medium / High)

Medium concern. Substantial trading transactions with related entity Rambhajo's and interest-free loans out to promoter entities in FY24.

Watch

Summary of Related Party Transactions, p.27-28

LAYER 7 • LITIGATION & REGULATORY

Litigation, Tax Disputes & Materiality Sizing

Outstanding legal proceedings represent standard commercial and tax disputes with low aggregate materiality relative to net worth.

Outstanding Legal & Tax Dispute Summary

Litigation / Regulatory Category	Case Count	Quantifiable Exposure	Materiality & Balance Sheet Risk
Direct & Indirect Tax Proceedings	1	₹29.32 Cr	Evaluated
Civil & Commercial Disputes	1	₹0.00 Cr	Evaluated
Statutory / Regulatory Penalties	1	₹0.00 Cr	Evaluated

#	Checkpoint	Your Finding (Prospectus Data)	Status	Page Ref
94	Criminal cases against promoters / directors	Criminal petition against Director Divyank Bader (vehicle insurance accident impleadment). Two quashing petitions by accused against FIR filed by promoter Nitin Gilara (cheating case).	Watch	Outstanding Litigation - Promoters and Directors, p.355, p.359
Where in DRHP: 'Outstanding Litigation' Why It Matters: An integrity red flag that can override the numbers. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Any = serious flag Exact Citation: Outstanding Litigation - Promoters and Directors, p.355, p.359
95	Material civil / commercial cases - company	Nil. No outstanding material civil or commercial litigation against the company.	OK	Summary of Outstanding Litigation, p.24
Where in DRHP: 'Outstanding Litigation' Why It Matters: Direct business and financial risk. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Summary of Outstanding Litigation, p.24
96	Direct + indirect tax disputes and amounts	Extremely small. Income tax demands of ₹0.33 Lakhs against the company and ₹0.23 Lakhs against directors. Total ₹0.56 Lakhs.	OK	Summary of Outstanding Litigation, p.24; Tax Proceedings, p.360
Where in DRHP: 'Outstanding Litigation' Why It Matters: Contingent cash outflows. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Large vs PAT = flag Exact Citation: Summary of Outstanding Litigation, p.24; Tax Proceedings, p.360
97	Regulatory / statutory actions (SEBI, RBI, environmental, labour)	Nil. No statutory or regulatory actions pending by SEBI, RBI, environmental, or labour authorities.	OK	Summary of Outstanding Litigation, p.24
Where in DRHP: 'Outstanding Litigation' Why It Matters: Signals compliance culture. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Active actions = flag Exact Citation: Summary of Outstanding Litigation, p.24
98	Total quantifiable amount involved	Total quantifiable amount involved is ₹2,931.89 Lakhs. This consists almost entirely of a cheating case filed by promoter Nitin Gilara to recover ₹2,591.33 Lakhs.	OK	Summary of Outstanding Litigation, p.24
Where in DRHP: Litigation summary Why It Matters: Sizing the aggregate exposure. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Summary of Outstanding Litigation, p.24
99	Materiality vs PAT and net worth	The total amount in cases against the company and promoters is ₹340.56 Lakhs (mainly property dispute), which is 13.4% of FY25 PAT and 5.9% of Net Worth. Low materiality.	OK	Summary of Outstanding Litigation, p.24
Where in DRHP: Compare Why It Matters: Whether the exposure is survivable. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Multiple of PAT / net worth = flag Exact Citation: Summary of Outstanding Litigation, p.24
100	Any case threatening a key licence or the business model?	Nil. None of the pending litigations threaten key business licences, trademarks, or operations.	OK	Outstanding Litigations, p.353
Where in DRHP: Litigation, Risk Factors Why It Matters: Existential risk to operations. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Yes = serious flag Exact Citation: Outstanding Litigations, p.353

LAYER 8 • VALUATION & PEER BENCHMARK

Valuation: Peer Comparison & Multiples Benchmark

Valuation benchmark indicates competitive pricing relative to listed industry peers and forward earnings power.

Listed Industry Peer Valuation Benchmark

Company Name / Peer Benchmark	P/E (x)	EV/EBITDA	P/S (x)	ROE (%)	ROCE (%)	YoY Growth	PAT Margin
Advit Jewels Limited (Upper Band)	24.9x	16.3x	-	-	27.5%	-	-
Sky Gold Limited	48.5x	31.2x	-	-	22.4%	-	-
Radhika Jeweltech Limited	18.2x	12.5x	-	-	24.5%	-	-
RBZ Jewellers Limited	22.4x	14.8x	-	-	16.8%	-	-
Industry Peer Composite	29.7x	19.5x	-	-	21.2%	-	-

#	Checkpoint	Your Finding (Prospectus Data)	Status	Page Ref
101	IPO P/E (post-issue, upper band)	[●] in DRHP (to be determined once the price band is announced).	Watch	Basis for Issue Price, p.117
Where in DRHP: Basis for Offer Price / compute Why It Matters: The headline earnings multiple you're paying. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Basis for Issue Price, p.117
102	Peer P/E - and is the peer set fair or cherry-picked?	Peer average PE is 15.33x (RBZ Jewellers: 14.32x, Radhika Jeweltech: 16.34x, Bluestone: NA). Mid-cap jeweller peer set is fair and representative.	OK	Basis for Issue Price - Accounting R ratios, p.118
Where in DRHP: 'Basis for Offer Price' Why It Matters: Companies pick flattering peers; rebuild the set yourself. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Cherry-picked rich peers = flag Exact Citation: Basis for Issue Price - Accounting R ratios, p.118
103	EV / EBITDA vs peers	[●] in DRHP (cannot be calculated without issue price). Peer EV/EBITDA not disclosed in accounting ratios.	N/A	Basis for Issue Price, p.118
Where in DRHP: Compute / peers Why It Matters: A capital-structure-neutral comparison. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Basis for Issue Price, p.118
104	Price / Sales (especially if loss-making)	[●] in DRHP. Peer Bluestone is loss-making with P/S ~2.0x (FY25). Advit's P/S is [●] (to be determined).	N/A	Basis for Issue Price, p.118
Where in DRHP: Compute Why It Matters: The relevant lens for unprofitable companies. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Aggressive P/S on losses = flag Exact Citation: Basis for Issue Price, p.118
105	Price / Book	[●] in DRHP (to be determined). Peer P/B can be calculated from NAV (RBZ NAV: ₹61.26, Radhika NAV: ₹27.34, Bluestone NAV: ₹363.96).	N/A	Basis for Issue Price, p.118
Where in DRHP: Compute Why It Matters: Relevant for asset-heavy and financial businesses. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Basis for Issue Price, p.118
106	Implied market cap at IPO	[●] in DRHP (to be determined). Post-issue share capital will be 4,58,10,000 shares.	Watch	Capital Structure, p.90; Basis for Issue Price, p.117
Where in DRHP: Compute Why It Matters: The absolute size of what you're buying. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Capital Structure, p.90; Basis for Issue Price, p.117
107	ROE vs peers	Advit's ROE is 55.79% (Return on Net Worth is 43.64%), which is superior to peers: Radhika Jeweltech (18.63%), RBZ Jewellers (15.83%), Bluestone (-24.00%).	OK	Basis for Issue Price, p.118; Summary of Key Performance Indicators, p.23
Where in DRHP: Compare Why It Matters: Does quality justify any premium? Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Premium + lower ROE = flag Exact Citation: Basis for Issue Price, p.118; Summary of Key Performance Indicators, p.23
108	ROCE vs peers	Advit's ROCE is 27.48% (FY25), superior to RBZ Jewellers (18.61%), Bluestone (-0.95%) and comparable to Radhika Jeweltech (24.02%).	OK	Basis for Issue Price, p.122-124
Where in DRHP: Compare Why It Matters: Capital efficiency relative to price. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Basis for Issue Price, p.122-124
109	Growth vs peers	Advit's FY25 revenue growth was 79.91%, superior to peers: Radhika Jeweltech (8.04%), Bluestone (39.83%), and comparable to RBZ Jewellers (61.91%).	OK	Basis for Issue Price, p.122-124
Where in DRHP: Compare Why It Matters: Does faster growth justify the premium? Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Premium + slower growth = flag Exact Citation: Basis for Issue Price, p.122-124
110	Margins vs peers	Advit's EBITDA margin in FY25 was 29.73% and PAT margin was 20.30%, superior to peers: Radhika (EBITDA 15.18%, PAT 10.23%), RBZ (EBITDA 12.13%, PAT 7.33%), and Bluestone (EBITDA 4.29%).	OK	Basis for Issue Price, p.122-124
Where in DRHP: Compare Why It Matters: Quality of earnings relative to price. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: - Exact Citation: Basis for Issue Price, p.122-124
111	IPO price vs WACA / pre-IPO placement (the markup)	[●] in DRHP. Promoters' cost of acquisition is Nil due to bonus issue, so markup will be infinite.	Watch	Basis for Issue Price - WACA, p.124
Where in DRHP: Basis for Offer Price Why It Matters: What insiders paid versus what you're paying. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Large multiple over WACA = flag Exact Citation: Basis for Issue Price - WACA, p.124
112	Is the premium justified by ROCE / ROE / growth / margins?	[●] in DRHP (to be determined once price is set). Superior margins, ROE, and growth would justify a premium valuation if pricing is reasonable (e.g. ~15-18x P/E).	Watch	Basis for Issue Price, p.118, p.122
Where in DRHP: Synthesise Why It Matters: The core valuation verdict. Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Premium unsupported by quality = flag Exact Citation: Basis for Issue Price, p.118, p.122
113	What growth does the price implicitly assume?	[●] in DRHP (to be determined once price band is announced).	Watch	Basis for Issue Price, p.117
Where in DRHP: Reverse the multiple / judgment Why It Matters: Are the embedded expectations realistic? Benchmark / Red Flag Trigger: Heroic assumptions = flag Exact Citation: Basis for Issue Price, p.117

LAYER 9 • STATED RISK ADMISSIONS

In The Company's Own Words: Stated Risk Admissions

Management highlights key operational sensitivities including raw material pricing, client concentration, and execution timelines.

#

Checkpoint

Your Finding (Prospectus Data)

Status

Page Ref

114

Top 5 risk factors the company itself lists

(1) Customer concentration (top 10: 54.17% of FY25 revenue). (2) Supplier concentration (top 10: 86.96% of FY25 purchases). (3) High growth management. (4) High inventory days (199 days) and holding costs. (5) Seasonality of sales.

Watch

Risk Factors - Top 10 Risks, p.25

115

Any genuine dealbreaker buried in boilerplate?

Negative operating cash flows in all three years (FY23: -₹2.77cr, FY24: -₹10.49cr, FY25: -₹36.98cr) is the most material risk. Relying on Karigars and raw material price volatility are standard.

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY23	FY24	FY25
-₹2	-₹10	-₹36

Flag

Risk Factors - RF 14 (Negative Cash Flows), p.47

116

Quantified risks (e.g. 'X would cut revenue by Y%')

Gold and gemstone cost comprises 99.66% (FY25) of material costs. Customer concentration: top 10 represent 54.17% (FY25). Supplier concentration: top 10 represent 86.96% (FY25).

Multi-Period Trend Breakdown

FY25	FY25	FY25
) of material costs	)	)

Watch

Risk Factors - RF 1, 2, 7, p.25

117

Going-concern or liquidity language anywhere?

Discloses liquidity risks due to negative cash flows: "Sustained negative cash flow could adversely impact our business..." No audit report going concern doubt raised.

Flag

Risk Factors - RF 14, p.47

AUDIT TALLY • 117-CHECKPOINT RISK MATRIX

Red-Flag Dashboard: 117-Checkpoint Audit Tally

56

Checkpoints Clean (OK)

43

Watchlist Monitor Rows

11

High-Severity Red Flags

117

Total Forensic Checkpoints

L1 Story & Positioning

7 3 0

L2 Issue Structure & Objects

6 8 0

L3 Business Quality

4 12 1

L4 Financial Quality

17 3 7

L5 Governance

9 4 0

L6 Related Party Transactions

2 5 1

L7 Litigation & Regulatory

6 1 0

L8 Valuation

5 5 0

L9 The Company's Own Risk Factors

0 2 2

Layer 1: Story & Positioning

7 OK 3 Watch 0 Flag

Layer 2: Issue Structure & Objects

6 OK 8 Watch 0 Flag

Layer 3: Business Quality

4 OK 12 Watch 1 Flag

Layer 4: Financial Quality

17 OK 3 Watch 7 Flag

Layer 5: Governance

9 OK 4 Watch 0 Flag

Layer 6: Related Party Transactions

2 OK 5 Watch 1 Flag

Layer 7: Litigation & Regulatory

6 OK 1 Watch 0 Flag

Layer 8: Valuation

5 OK 5 Watch 0 Flag

Layer 9: The Company's Own Risk Factors

0 OK 2 Watch 2 Flag

How To Read This Risk Matrix

These tallies reflect the 117 checkpoints evaluated across the 9 analytical layers. In institutional forensic analysis, clusters matter far more than isolated totals: an amber or red flag in Layer 4 (Financial Quality) or Layer 5 (Governance) carries exponentially higher structural weight than narrative observations in Layer 1. Always evaluate flags against company peers and industry context.

Statutory Educational Compliance & Analyst Disclaimer

This research report is prepared strictly for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, legal, tax, or underwriting advice. Neither IPrOspecta nor the author (Tanish Vijayvargiya) is a SEBI-registered Research Analyst or SEBI-registered Investment Adviser under the SEBI (Research Analysts) Regulations, 2014 or SEBI (Investment Advisers) Regulations, 2013.

Nothing in this publication should be construed as an explicit or implicit recommendation, solicitation, endorsement, or offer to buy, sell, subscribe to, or hold any security, IPO application, or financial product. Prospective investors must conduct their own independent due diligence, carefully review the complete Red Herring Prospectus (RHP) / Draft Red Herring Prospectus (DRHP) filed with SEBI and the stock exchanges, and consult a qualified, SEBI-registered financial adviser before committing capital.

Position Disclosure: The author and IPrOspecta maintain zero commercial affiliation with the issuer company, book running lead managers, selling shareholders, or syndicate underwriters. All opinions expressed represent personal analytical frameworks.