Action to be taken on E-filed ITRs of A.Y. 2012-13 pending for processing at CPC having refund greater than or equal to Rs. 10 Lakhs

Letter [F.NO.DIT(S)-III/CPC/2012-13/Demand Management], dated 30-1-2013

Kind attention is drawn to the above mentioned subject. For the A.Y. 2012-13 e-filed returns cases till 22nd Jan. 2013, where refund is likely to be > = Rs. 10 lakhs are 28,444 in number, which are currently pending for processing at CPC. These ITRs are categorized as under :

(a)  Cases where there are refunds likely to be > = Rs. 10 Lakhs.

(b)  Cases where there are likely refunds > = Rs. 10 Lakhs as well as demands have been uploaded as per CPC-FAS.

2. The above data can be accessed on i-Taxnet on the following path :


3. The Assessing Officers are required to take action as under :

♦  for the cases falling at (a) above, i.e. where there is refund without demand as per the CPC-FAS, to kindly get it checked whether any demand remains outstanding in those cases. If yes, the AOs may upload these demands on CPC-FAS.

♦  Regarding cases at (b) above, i.e. where there is refund with demand, they may reconfirm or update the demands, so that during processing refunds can be adjusted with updated demands outstanding as per CPC-FAS.

4. Each CCIT may, therefore, monitor the above action to be taken by the AOs and certify within a period of 21 days. A compliance report may also be sent to respective Zonal Members, CBDT with a copy to CIT(CPC), Bangaluru, at his e-mail id [email protected] and DIT(S)-III on e-mail id [email protected] In case no response is received, the e-returns shall be processed at CPC, Bangaluru.

More Under Income Tax


  1. Ajay Yeola says:

    I need help to resolve the issue of Tax Demand by IT dept. for my e-filing for AY 2009-10.
    I had by mistake put my gross income as my taxable income in the form and uploaded the same. The IT Dept has put a huge Demand on me. I sent an paper application for correction and filed rectification u/s 154 also. But got rejected. What to do in such a case.
    I am a salaried person and all tax gets deducted as TDS. Can this issue be resolved ?
    With best regards,
    Ajay Yeola.

  2. Anil says:

    The mess created for non allowance of TDS credit to deductees is wholly attributable to the mistakes/errors committed by deductors since the days of e-TDS filing started. Even today, more than 80 -90% of the deductors, including banks, govt agency etc rely upon outsourcing for filing e-TDS returns. They are not professionals, simply layman are put on job, who complete the job half way. Whatever errors committed in uploading of e-TDS by quoting wrong PAN, no PAN, error in amount, wrong name etc., all mistakes left uncorrected. This results in poor punishment to deductees, for no fault of theirs. The I T Deptt. cannot be blamed as unless dedcutors files correction statement, and rectify the mistake, and unless the credit in deductees account at i.t. deptt e-tds data base appears, deptt is not allowing credit. If deptt. liberalise the system to allow TDS credit after ‘due verification’ (physical verification) massive fraud takes place resultant into third persons jumps into picture (very same persons who upload wrong PAN etc.) and swallows crores of govt money in their name. Ultimately it is deductors fault either wrong uploading or no uploading of e-tds return. Pl visit RBI website, in a customer service study 2011, RBI has given opinion that if tax payers does not get credit of TDS due to bank’s fault, the banks should suitably compensate deductees as due to their fault that deductees are suffering. Anyone look into this angle.

  3. S PRAKASH says:

    What has been achived in the earlier years by CPC? Even the 140A challans and TDS which appeared in 26AS it self was not given credit, and the assessing officers blame the CPC and the CPC adjust the refunds as “adjusted for arrears”, even with out a vaild demand.Earler when manual processing was there at least the assessee used to assessing officer and produce the TDS details or the challans,but CPC for every mistake of some one else, ask the assessee to upload the details which will be never attended too.The banks the deducters may have make the mistakes and the poor assessee will not get the refund.Who is to be blamed? Assessee, BAnks, Deductor, Assessing Officer, CPC, Finanace Minister, or the CBDT?When all these will end?

  4. sivaprasad says:

    CPC did the same way earlier also. cpc has adjusted the demand amounts to refunds, based on the penidng demans uploaded by assessing officers. assessing offiers simply uploaded the pending demands in cpc website without checking the reasons / submissions made by assessees for pending demands.

    assessees will face the same problem again.

  5. G. Padmanabhan says:

    The department has already made a mess of the whole thing by asking the officers to upload all the outstanding demands in their books to CPC without verifying or confirming they are actually outstanding or having been collected/ adjusted not updated in their records. CPC did not even have the courtesy to inform the assessees concerned that certain demands were uploaded by their concerned officers.CPC was trigger happy to adjust anything and everything, paving way for lot of cumbersome procedures with the ITOs for reclaiming the already-paid-adjusted-demand, but not updated in the system.The department in issuing these instructions is obvious that it has not learnt from its past mistakes but bent upon causing nuisance to the tax payers and causing loss to the exchequer.

  6. vswami says:

    The directive aims at speeding up the process of settling refund claims, but restricted to ay 2012-13 and claims over Rs 10 lacs.
    There seems to be no valid rhyme or reason for not issuing a similar directive, on a first-in, first-out basis, for ay 2011-12; despite e’filing was extended /mandated for certain categories, e.g. individuals from 2012-13, and onwards. Same holds good also to the poser as to why for ay 2011-12 refunds should be expedited in all cases, regardless of whether reurn was e’filed or otherwise, and of the quantum of refund claim made and o/s.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Posts by Date

October 2021