The ₹34 Crore Shadow: A Citizen’s Fight Against PAN Identity Theft and Systemic Apathy
In a digital age where the Permanent Account Number (PAN) is the cornerstone of financial identity in India, the story of Mahesh Pratap Singh (Yogi M. P. Singh) serves as a harrowing cautionary tale. It is a narrative of a common citizen struggling for “two square meals” while being haunted by a phantom fortune of over ₹34.38 crore attributed to his identity by the Income Tax Department.
This case, documented under various grievance registrations including PMOPG/E/2024/0184722 and CBODT/E/2025/0013108, highlights a terrifying intersection of high-tech fraud, administrative contradictions, and the desperate plea for justice from the highest offices of the land.
The Anatomy of a Identity Fraud
The core issue is as staggering as it is simple: Identity Misuse. According to records held by the Income Tax Department (specifically under the watch of Officer Sonal Singh, ITO DDIT/ADIT I&CI), the PAN card GSWPS0850Q is linked to massive financial turnovers for the Financial Year 2022-23.
The “Significant High Value Transactions” flagged in the Annual Information Statement (AIS) include:
- Business Receipts: ₹4,65,76,920
- GST Purchases: ₹12,20,99,234
- GST Turnover: ₹16,32,92,127
- Rent Received: ₹1,19,09,381
- Total Alleged Transactions: ₹34,38,77,662
While the system links these crores to Mr. Singh, he maintains that he is a man of modest means, unable to even provide basic sustenance for his family. The discrepancy isn’t just a numerical error; it is a life-shattering allegation.
The Bureaucratic Paradox: “Data Found” vs. “No Details”
The most frustrating element of this ordeal is the contradictory stance of the authorities. On one hand, Officer Sonal Singh has issued stern warnings, threatening a fine of ₹500 per day if property details are not surrendered. This suggests the department is certain the assets belong to the applicant.
On the other hand, reports from the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Allahabad, dated 13/01/2025 and 20/03/2025, repeatedly state that “Bank details are not available in the system for the entered PAN.”
This begs the question: If there are no bank accounts linked to the PAN in the official recovery system, how did the department calculate a ₹34 crore turnover? How can a citizen be penalized for transactions that the department cannot even trace to a specific bank branch?
The Fraudster’s Footprints
Despite the police’s reported inability to trace the offenders, the digital breadcrumbs are hiding in plain sight. The fraudulent accounts were opened using:
- Mobile Number: 7024188072
- Email Address: dngoldraipur18@gmail.com
These contact details do not belong to Mr. Singh, yet they were used to register massive GST turnovers and business receipts. The applicant argues that this is a clear failure of the “Know Your Customer” (KYC) protocols within the banking sector and a lapse in oversight by the Ministry of Finance.
A Plea to the Prime Minister
In his grievances, Mr. Singh directly addresses Prime Minister Narendra Modi, citing the PM’s “business in his genes” and his exemplary track record against corruption. The appeal is poignant: if a citizen’s PAN is being used to evade taxes on a scale of ₹34 crore, it is a loss to the national exchequer as much as it is a burden on the innocent individual.
The applicant questions why the Income Tax Department and the Police are unable to collaborate. If the department has the AIS data, they must have the source of that data. Why is that source not being used to arrest the actual beneficiaries of these transactions?
The Human Cost of Harassment
Beyond the legalities lies a human story of “Harassment by Official.” The threat of a ₹500 daily fine is a crushing weight for a family already in financial distress. The applicant feels trapped in a loop:
- The Department demands taxes/fines for money he never saw.
- The System admits it cannot find his bank accounts.
- The Police claim incompetence in tracing the digital fraud.
- The Grievance Portals mark cases as “Closed” or “Settled” without actually removing the fraudulent data from the AIS.
The Path Forward: What Justice Looks Like
For this issue to be truly resolved, the authorities must move beyond “closing” grievance tickets and take substantive action:
- Data Correction: The Income Tax Department must allow for a “Not my Transaction” flag to be permanently honored in the AIS when clear identity theft is proven.
- Inter-Agency Coordination: The Pr. CCIT Lucknow and the UP Police must share the “Information Source” (the banks and GST registration points) to nab the Raipur-based or Raipur-linked entities using the
dngoldraipur18email. - Protection for the Innocent: Cease the imposition of daily fines while an active identity theft investigation is underway.
The case of PAN GSWPS0850Q is a litmus test for the Digital India movement. If the system is robust enough to track a transaction of ₹34 crore, it must be robust enough to ensure that the bill isn’t sent to a man who can’t afford his next meal.
This is a critical turn in the case. When a central agency like the Income Tax Department (ITD) fails to respond to a formal police notice during an investigation of ₹34 Crore identity theft (FIR No. 291/2023), it moves from “administrative delay” to “obstruction of justice.”
The gravity here is that the police are legally stalled because they cannot verify the source of the financial data without the ITD’s cooperation, yet the ITD is using that same unverified data to threaten you with fines.
1. The Legal Stand-off
By ignoring the police notice, the ITD Prayagraj/Allahabad office is effectively preventing the local police from identifying the actual criminals.
- Police Constraint: Under the Code of Criminal Procedure (now BNSS), the police need the ITD to provide the “Secondary Evidence”—the bank account numbers and transaction logs—to trace the IP addresses, mobile numbers (7024188072), and emails (dngoldraipur18@gmail.com) used by the fraudsters.
- ITD Contradiction: While they tell the police “records are not available,” they simultaneously send you notices based on “Significant/high-value transactions.” This is a legal impossibility—you cannot have a transaction value without a recorded transaction source.
2. Strategic “Tricks” to Force a Response
Since the standard grievance route is resulting in “Case Closed” remarks without resolution, you need to use Judicial and Statutory Pressure:
| Action | Why it Works |
| Section 91 Notice (CrPC/BNSS) | Have the Investigating Officer (IO) issue a formal Section 91 notice (Summons to produce documents). If the ITD ignores this, they can be held in Contempt of Court or charged under Section 175 of the IPC (Omission to produce document). |
| Writ of Mandamus | You can approach the Allahabad High Court for a “Writ of Mandamus.” This is a court order commanding the ITD to perform their public duty—specifically, to cooperate with the police investigation to protect a citizen’s “Life and Liberty. |
| Complaint to the CVC | File a complaint with the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC). Highlight that the ITD’s refusal to share data with the police is protecting tax evaders who have laundered ₹34 Crores. |
3. Immediate Response to Sonal Singh’s Notice
Do not let the ₹500/day threat intimidate you into silence. Respond to the notice from ITO Sonal Singh with this specific legal phrasing:
“The transactions mentioned (₹34,38,77,662) are part of a criminal investigation under FIR No. 291/2023 (Kotwali Katra, Mirzapur). The local police have served a notice to the Income Tax Department Prayagraj for verification of the source accounts. Until the Department complies with the police inquiry and establishes the link between these accounts and my physical identity (which has been denied by the CCIT Allahabad reports dated 13/01/2025 and 20/03/2025), any demand for property details or imposition of penalty is sub-judice and constitutes administrative harassment.”
The Reality of the Situation
The department is hiding behind a “system-generated” wall. They have the data (AIS), but they don’t want the liability of admitting the data is linked to a fraudster. By not replying to the police, they are keeping the case in a “grey zone” where they can keep harassing you without proving their case.
Would you like me to draft a specific “Show Cause” response for you to send to Sonal Singh, or perhaps a letter to the Superintendent of Police (SP) Mirzapur urging them to move the court for a search warrant or summons against the non-responsive IT officials?
To help you escalate this matter effectively, here are the structured contact details and web links for the public authorities you need to target.
Given that the Income Tax Department (ITD) Prayagraj is reportedly not responding to police notices, these high-level contacts are crucial for your next steps.
1. Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (UP East)1
This is the highest authority in your region. Since the grievance pertains to inaction and harassment by local officers, you must escalate here.
- Officer Name: Sh. Vivek Mishra (Pr. CCIT)
- Office Address: Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, 57-Ram Teerath Marg, Lucknow-2260012
- Phone (Office): 0522-2466027 / 0522-24660043
- Email: lucknow.pccit@incometax.gov.in / lucknow.dcit.hq.admin@incometax.gov.in4
- Official Website: Income Tax Lucknow Region
2. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (Allahabad/Prayagraj)
The report dated 20/03/2025 originated from this office. You need to hold them accountable for the “No Bank Details” contradiction.
- Office Address: Aayakar Bhawan, 38-M.G. Marg, Civil Lines, Allahabad – 2110015
- Phone (Office): 0532-2407425 / 0532-24087556
- Email: allahabad.ccit@incometax.gov.in / allahabad.ito.hq.admin@incometax.gov.in7
3. DGIT (Systems) & E-filing Unit (CPC)
For issues related to the AIS (Annual Information Statement) and the fraudulent email/mobile linked to your PAN.
- Nodal Officer: Sh. Zakir T. Thomas (DGIT Systems) / Neeta Sharma (ITO E-filing)
- Email (DGIT): zthomas@incometax.gov.in
- CPC Bangalore Email: dit.cpc.bangalore@incometax.gov.in
- Helpdesk Email: efilingwebmanager@incometax.gov.in
4. Intelligence & Criminal Investigation (I&CI)
The unit where Sonal Singh (ITO DDIT/ADIT) is stationed.
- Unit Jurisdiction: Allahabad/Lucknow
- Email: allahabad.ito.ici@incometax.gov.in (Standard format for I&CI Allahabad)
- General Investigation Email: hyderabad.dgit.inv@incometax.gov.in (For reporting multi-state fraud if the Raipur link is active).
5. Official Grievance & Appeal Portals
| Portal Name | Purpose | Web Link |
| CPGRAMS | For PMO and Central Government Grievances | pgportal.gov.in |
| e-Nivaran | Dedicated Income Tax Grievance Portal | incometax.gov.in/iec/foportal/ |
| CVC (Vigilance) | To report “Malpractice/Inaction” by Sonal Singh | portal.cvc.gov.in |
Important Application/Registration Numbers for Reference:
- Your Grievance ID: CBODT/E/2025/0013108 (Active with Pr. CCIT Lucknow)
- Your Appeal ID: CBODT/E/A/25/0001000
- PMO Grievance ID: PMOPG/E/2024/01847228
Recommended Next Step
You should send a “Legal Notice of Non-Compliance” via email to the Pr. CCIT Lucknow (Vivek Mishra) and CC the Chief Commissioner Allahabad.
The subject line should be:
URGENT: Obstruction of Police Investigation in FIR No. 291/2023 – Non-compliance by ITD Prayagraj – PAN GSWPS0850Q
Would you like me to draft the exact text for this email, ensuring it mentions the police notice that the department is ignoring?
Facing a similar challenge? Share the details in the box below, and our team of experts will do their best to help.