Originally posted by : Balaji |
 |
Dear NJR,
Your understanding of the current situation faced by several assessees is almost perfect and the solutions you have offered are practical.I request your views after perusing the following facts :
1) My mother (for A.Y.2008) and I (for A.Y.2006) also received such E-mail messages from CPC,Bangalore on 23.10.2011 and today I discussed the issue with the A.O. where I filed the Returns for the said years (Salary Processing Centre at BKC,Mumbai) [even though the jurisdictional A.O. mentioned on both the intimations received from CPC was Ward 17(2)-2,Mumbai].
2) In my mother's case,due to a technical error the System had raised a Demand for A.Y.2008-09 but the ITO had on her own motion (without my applying for a rectification) rectified the Demand u/s 154 in 2010.There is no Demand reflecting in their system now.But since CPC,Bangalore has this Demand in their records,she suggested that I wait till this Demand is adjusted against any future refund and subsequently approach BKC,Mumbai and claim the refund for A.Y.2008-09.
3) In my case,while processing u/s 143(1) the system had not included the self-assessment tax that I had paid for A.Y.2006-07 and a Demand was raised on me.But the same was rectified in 2007 on an application by me u/s 154 and a refund issued.Today the A.O. mentioned to me that the rectification must have been carried out manually in 2007 and she suggested the same way forward like the one mentioned for my mother,i.e. wait for the actual adjustment of Demand to take place at a future date in CPC,Bangalore and then approach BKC,Mumbai for refund of Demand amount adjusted against A.Y.2006-07.
Need your expert opinion on :
1) Should I take up the matter with our current jurisdictional A.O. mentioned in the 2 Communications(aka Ward 17(2)-2,Mumbai)? Or should I keep quiet till the Demands are actually adjusted in some future year and then take up the issue with BKC,Mumbai(as suggested by the ITO today)?
2) Does the solution suggested by the ITO at BKC,Mumbai make sense to you?As already explained above,there are no Demands pending in both the cases and I've documentary evidences for the same.But since CPC,Bangalore has made its position clear that it would not involve itself in clearing issues related to old outstanding Demands(as reflected in their system) and would go ahead and adjust the same against future refunds,if any, the only other option left open is to approach my current jurisdictional A.O. but I wonder how helpful it would be.Would be obliged for your advise.
The post is long since I had to give the full facts but trust you would help me out.Helpful suggestions from other experts/Forum members is also requested.Many thanks in advance to all.
|
 |
Dear All,
Seasons Greetings! Sorry for delay as I was out for a vacation with family. I hv read various further viewpoints in this thread. I hv already made clear in my earlier thread that this COMMUNICATION OF ARREAR from CPC is just clarificatory in nature to clear the stand of CPC that CPC is not at all responsible for wrong adj of demands pertaining to earlier period agst refund receivable by the assessee. They want to make it clear that they hv just picked up the amt shown as outstanding in CPC database & said amt hv been posted/uploaded by the jurisdictional assessing officers.
On going thro' various such email recd, i found that in case of some assessees, CPC had already adj o/s agst refund for A.Y. 2010-11 prior to sending this COMMUNICATION by email. We hv found this when we hv recd Intimation u/s 143(1).
As arrear demand of earlier Asst Yr hv been adj by CPC, we hv crossed check Return/Docs pertaining to that asst yr to find out correctness of demand raised. We found that in some cases, they hv raised said demand by sending Intimation u/s 143(1). Although, we hd filed rectification (in case of wrong demand) OR assessee hd paid that demand (in case of correct demand), said demand has not been deleted by AO from Demand Register. As such, while uploading data in respect of old o/s, AO must hv uploaded said demand (although not correct) & hence all mess followed up.
Subsequently, we hd filed a letter to AO stating the facts on case to case basis & demanded refund of amt which has been wrongly adj agst refund for A.Y. 2010-11. In few cases, AO has admitted our application & also refunded the amt. to the assessee (although very few instances). But all the AO are bound to accept ur application if CPC has wrongly adj ur refund.
Thus, crux of the matter is -
1) As soon as u receive such email, check records pertaining to that asst yr. (If AY2008 i.e. Asst Yr. 2008-09 & yr ending 31.03.2008);
2) If u find that demand shown as outstanding is correct i.e. demand was raised by the dept as per Intimation u/s 143(1) or any other DN but u hv ignored it due to lack of time or any other reason eventhough u beleived it to be correct, then pay the o/s demand immediately. Write one letter to ur jurusdictional AO refering comm. recd from CPC & encl paid challan requesting ur AO to delete the said demand from DC Register as well as from CPC database with clear mention about no future adj of said demand agst any refund due so that if at all CPC adj said demand u can claim refund from ur AO by refering to ur this letter.
3) Otherwise (i.e. if demand shown as o/s is wrong), write to ur AO refering to Comm recd from CPC by giving ref to ur earlier letter for rectification or already paid challans or in case no demands at all explaining the facts thereof with specific mention in ur letter about no adj of said demand in agst any future refund.
I hv also read in this thread that address of assessee was totally diff. & not matching with regd address of the assessee. In that case also it is better to clarify the stand by writing one letter to AO. It may so happen that CPC has auto-generated said letter/emails & therefore recd by the wrong assessee. Same mistake was happened in the past when CPC has auto-generated emails informing assessees about Non-Recpt of ITR-V eventhough Returns of the Cos hv been filed with digital sign.
Thanks & Regards,