2012 (5) TMI 319 - HC - Income Tax

Difficulty and harassment in relation of PAN card - inconvenience and harassment without any palpable advantage or benefit to the Department. - Appeal admitted and notices issued.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenges faced by Income Tax assessees due to faulty processing of Income Tax Returns and TDS deductions.
2. Lack of credit for TDS deductions due to mismatch in reporting by departments, leading to unnecessary demands and rectification procedures.
3. Difficulties in rectifying TDS discrepancies, especially when the department refuses to revise statements.
4. Communication of outstanding demands to Central Processing Unit without rectifications, leading to adjustments in refunds without informing assessees.
5. Issues with refunds issued in the name of deceased assesses and challenges faced by legal heirs in rectifying the same.
6. Technical problems in CPC software affecting the consideration of taxes paid by assessees in ITR 4S.
7. Charging of interest under sections 234B and 234C for assessees filing returns under section 44AD, despite not being obliged to pay advance tax.
8. Charging of interest under section 234A for late filing, even if taxes have been duly paid, contrary to the Supreme Court ruling.
9. Errors in TDS returns due to mistakes by deductors, resulting in non-reflection in Form 26AS and denial of credit to deductees.

Analysis:
1. The High Court addressed the challenges faced by Income Tax assessees due to faulty processing of returns and TDS deductions. The letter highlighted issues such as mismatch in TDS reporting leading to demands, difficulties in rectification procedures, and challenges for legal heirs in rectifying refunds issued in the name of deceased assesses.

2. Specific queries were raised regarding the procedures followed under Section 245 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, adjustments of refunds, communication of rejection of TDS certificates, verification of old demands, and steps to ensure correct uploading of TDS details by deductors. The Court sought responses on the remedy available to assessees in case of deductor errors and the procedure to claim benefits of TDS not uploaded by deductors.

3. The Court emphasized the need for a counter affidavit to provide details on the number of assessees facing adjustments in refunds against demands, actions taken against non-compliant deductors, and instances of challenges faced by assessees due to new PAN card issuances. The appointment of Amicus Curiae highlighted concerns regarding address changes and rectification procedures related to PAN details.

4. The Court aimed to address the systemic issues causing hardships to tax payers and sought responses from relevant authorities to mitigate these challenges effectively. The detailed analysis of the issues raised in the letter and the subsequent queries indicated a comprehensive approach by the Court to ensure fair treatment and rectification procedures for Income Tax assessees facing difficulties due to processing errors and TDS discrepancies.