Rahul Kumar Singh Vs AO (ITAT Mumbai)
The ITAT Mumbai heard the appeal of Rahul Kumar Singh against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The case stemmed from allegations that the appellant was a beneficiary of fake invoices provided by M/s Himadri Foods Ltd. The Income Tax Department had received information from the “Insight portal” revealing that M/s Himadri Foods Ltd. issued fake invoices to the appellant for a sum of Rs. 11.88 lakh. In response to the notices, the appellant filed a return but failed to comply with multiple subsequent notices. The Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, making an addition of Rs. 37.83 lakh, considering the unexplained credits in the appellant’s bank account from M/s Himadri Foods Ltd.
The appellant appealed the decision, arguing that they were only providing security services to M/s Himadri Foods Ltd. and not involved in the sale or purchase of goods. The appeal also highlighted that the AO had not followed due procedure, and the necessary documents were not provided to the authorities earlier due to lack of proper opportunity. The CIT(A) had confirmed the AO’s additions, citing non-submission of important documents such as GST returns, Profit & Loss account, and balance sheets. The appellant also failed to substantiate the nature of the credits received from M/s Himadri Foods Ltd.
