22 May 2020
CPC sent intimation 143 (1)(a)(iv) showing variance on the declared amount on Schedule OS. after noticing the issue, the deductor revise the 26AS. Demand was raises base in 194J from the rent, and added to the declared OS income shown in 26AS. The entire rent was declared correctly. In short it amounted to being tax twice. Have requested to reprocess the return base on the revise 26AS by the deductor. This is for AY 2017. Now I receive 245 notice of demand to be deducted from my ITR 2019. No professional fee income is derived by the assessee. Mainly rental income & F.D. interest inc. only. How to end this matter.
23 May 2020
Two of my clients were also having same sort of problems. In their cases they had contract income but deductor deducted TDS @ 10% u/s 194J and later the TDS return of the deductor was corrected showing deduciton u/s 194C. Form 26AS is now showing deuciton u/s 194C and also u/s 194J as old entry and then one correction entry resulting in Zero deductio u/s 194J. We filed rectification u/s 154 but the same way the CPC continued to take 50% of receipts u/s 44ADA in addition to the income returned. Revised returns were filed and one case was correctly processed while other was processed again taking professional income. Application u/s 154 was filed but they did not entertain it and reprocessed in the same way. Your case is also like that of mine. Only recourse available is not to file an appeal before CIT(A). So please file an appeal before CIT(A) in Form 35 online or you may go for a revision u/s 264 before CIT.
23 May 2020
Sir, in your case to remove the wrong entry 10% deducted 194J The deductor should indicate in 26AS under remark 'B' with minus sign, the exact amount shown in 194J. By placing zero, the first entry really was not removed. Have the deductor do the above . Now whether rectification 154 or revise of ITR has to be done this is my dilemma.
In my case the deductor revise the 26AS correctly. CPC was requested to reprocess again the ITR. upon reprocessing the ITR every entry as declared will match. What and how to go about 154 reply and what xml file to attach is my issue.
04 June 2020
There seems to be four ways to resolve this issue; 1. Rectification under section 154, 2. Revision of income tax return under section 139(5), 3. Filing appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), and 4. Filing revision application under section 264.
If first two options do not work, one out of third and fourth should be availed.
04 June 2020
Thanks Mr. Baranwal ji, At present CPC sent notice u/s 245 to adjust the demand from AY 2017-18 to the refund to my AY 2019-20 by the Asst. Director inc. Tax, CPC. As usual my reply was in disagreement with the demand. One good thing now in the IT portal. under outstanding demand. There is an area one can place a remark, I gave, reprocess the ITR since the 26AS had been revised by the deductor and there is a provision to upload letter & 26AS in ZIP or PDF file of which I did. Submitted successfully . However , it is subject to the verification and confirmation by your Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. At this stage I should just wait to hear from JAO. Now, last year as suggested from calls made to CPC or call center to meet JAO, of which I did. The fellow was very cordial but pass on the issue to the inspector. Kept making phone calls to JAO and inspector beside have personally met the JAO/Inspector up to present nothing has been done. The inspector now says to go for appeal which I feel is ridiculous cause it is a tedious process for a simple issue u/s 154. Mind you there are 3 exactly similar issues that has been lingering since year 2017
As of today am going to forward the letter & 26AS that I've submitted in the IT portal of which I know the JAO must have received it by now. What more can happen after this is unknown to me.
05 June 2020
Keep on filing Rectification applicaitn to CPC. After 3-4 rectification applications CPC is transferring the rectification rights to Jurisdictional AO. Once transferred the rights to AO get it rectified. However, at the same time it is suggested to file an appeal to CIT (A).
In our case we are also raising a grievance on PMPGP
05 June 2020
Shri. Chhajed ji, when the issue was obviously cause by erroneous section head in 26AS and the deductor had revise 26AS and clearly showing upon reprocessing the ITR base on revised 26AS. The variance will be extinguished. At present clearly it has been stated the matter is passed on to the JAO. I would assume the JAO will inform me. Beside the JAO is already aware of the matter. What is the harm on waiting to hear from JAO? The 3 cases are from individuals deriving rental income only & interest from FD. I still find at this stage going for an appeal is not warranted with out the JAO'S decision. What do you say Sir.
05 June 2020
the rectification rights have been transferred to AO then you should file an application for rectification to Jurisdictional AO manually and if he rectifies the mistake well and if he rejects the application then we may go for appeal against rejection of rectification application.
05 June 2020
The purpose of filing a complaint on CPGRAMS is that it might rectify the processing system at CPC so that such harassment of assessees is avoided.
05 June 2020
I've also made several complaints on e-nivaran in 3 cases and on one case tried also Aarkar Sewa kendra with different JAO. The inspectors in this case does not move or do any thing. Today I made a call to the JAO. who is not happy receiving some thing from CPC wrt to one case , mentioning why CPC is not finishing the matter and send the refund. Then also requested me to send him an e-mail that I did with the same attachment sent to CPC . There was also another issue going for the same assessees wrt the refunds being rejected they say by the bank reason given "OTHERS" where no one can explain what constitute others. In this case also CPC suggested to meet again JAO and give the A/c, No., IFSC, MICR and name of the bank. .The AO will instruct SBI to send the cheque to me. Lets inform each other on whatever comes out on our persistent efforts to resolve the pending issues . Keep in touch.
05 June 2020
Well, so far just got informed the JAO states he will give his opinion and I guest he will discuss it with the commissioner on the 2 cases with him. As for the other . The JAO Doesn't want to receive my call he wants me just to send him an e-mail.
05 June 2020
Sir before 2016 most oftem we just look at the total on the 26AS and file out ITR. with out checking the Section head. And quite often the processors also overlooks the section head.
2017 CPC was trying to speed up processing of ITR. A software was developed. The software computer detects the annomally under different section head.
The issue is cause by the deductors of TDS. Make it a point if receiving quarterly your 16A, 16 or 26AS check the section head on every entry and also match the interest & TDS with the interest Certificate issue by banks from their system.(referred to FD) before filing your ITR.
05 June 2020
Just wait for the AO to decide the issue. No need to talk over telephone. Whatever details sought by him provide timely and wait for the final order. If it is in your favour matter ends and if rejected then go for appeal to CIT (A) or revision before CIT.
06 June 2020
Agreed ! Chhajed ji. but am very optimistic the matter will be sorted out and finally put an end to the matters mentioned. Sir Just a thought, on what grounds can a JAO reject a straight forward error issue clearly in the 26AS that had been corrected and revised by the deductor?.
06 June 2020
Agreed ! Chhajed ji. but am very optimistic the matter will be sorted out and finally put an end to the matters mentioned. Sir Just a thought, on what grounds can a JAO reject a straight forward error issue clearly in the 26AS that had been corrected and revised by the deductor?.
06 June 2020
Agreed ! Chhajed ji. but am very optimistic the matter will be sorted out and finally put an end to the matters mentioned. Sir Just a thought, on what grounds can a JAO reject a straight forward error issue clearly in the 26AS that had been corrected and revised by the deductor?.
06 June 2020
Agreed ! Chhajed ji. but am very optimistic the matter will be sorted out and finally put an end to the matters mentioned. Sir Just a thought, on what grounds can a JAO reject a straight forward error issue clearly in the 26AS that had been corrected and revised by the deductor?.
06 June 2020
Agreed ! Chhajed ji. but am very optimistic the matter will be sorted out and finally put an end to the matters mentioned. Sir Just a thought, on what grounds can a JAO reject a straight forward error issue clearly in the 26AS that had been corrected and revised by the deductor?.
06 June 2020
Once the AO goes through the case he must rectify the mistake and not reject . But, sometimes the AO in hurry, without going into details simply pass rejection order. In such a situation one will have to file appeal.
06 June 2020
Shri Chhajed ji. Are the JAO not oblige to give the reason why the matter is being rejected to allow the assessee to give their reply? before going for appeal? I feel for simple issues, one should exhaust matters at the AO level. Yes Sir, I absolutely agree if all fail, one has to go for an appeal.
08 June 2020
In one of the JAO send me an email reply stating: "Income computation can not be initiated for this PAN and AYas rights has not been transferred by CPC to ITBA for processing". The quoted reply was sent as an attachment taken from computer ( ITBA- Rectification). Similar reply was there for another case last year. CPC informed through email that PAN & AY had been transferred. So I visited the JAO and gave a copy that states so. The inspector who was delegated to do the job must have overlooked resolving the issue within 30 days and did not act for good 3 months. I assume CPC must have canceled or retrieved the transfer cause when I phoned the inspector he sound helpless. However by tomorrow the JAO suggested to call him. Within 2-3 wks time I shall try also to make complaint to CPGRAM.
CAclubindia
