Please provide correct advice in the following situation.

We filed ROI for AY 2019-20 on 30-10-2019 and paid a tax amount of Rs 1,20,03,465/- under section 115JB. Above return was processed u/s 143 (1) by intimation dated 19-05-2020. The Company has deposited Advance tax of Rs. 40, 00,000/- and ITR -6 for AY 2019-20 was filed under Section 139 on 30-10-2019 to obviate any violation in Tax compliance including the TDS claim of Rs. 87,29,484/-. In the Intimation order the assessing officer had accepted the income and other claims of the Appellant but had demanded Rs 97,85,148/- as balance tax and interest.

During the Assessment Year relevant to Previous Year 2018-19, the land under the ownership of the Assessee has been taken over by the Government for Guruvayur Dewaswam (GD). LA compensation of Rs.38565360/- (on 5- 2-2018), Rs.4,00,00,000/- (on 4-2-2019), and Rs.48,28,009/- on19-11-2020 were paid to the Petitioner Company. Deductor, GD did not deposit the TDS to government in relevant years, this resulted in the demand of Rs. 97,85,148/- on Company towards balance tax and interest in the intimation u/s 143 (1) dated 19-05-2020. GD deposited Rs.95,02,088 /- towards TDS and Rs.21, 25,421 /-towards TDS and interest on 30-1-2021 and filed TDS return for the Assessment Year 2021-22. (not AY 2019-20).

Deductor is delaying filing revised TDS return in spite of many requests even by Income tax authorities.

Can the Income tax department seek to recover Income tax with fine from Company for AY 2019-20, on mere fact that Petitioner could not account for deposit of such tax (TDS) (Rs.87,29,484/-, only because the deductor, after paying the compensation to Petitioner in relevant year, did not deposit TDS to government revenue? Should the assessee suffer for the fault of the deductor? We understand There is a bar under Section 205 and circular of CBDT in this matter.

Dear Mr Tanna, Before soliciting your sincere opinion I must first congratulate and compliment you for the benevolent job being done to alleviate the problems being faced by the solo taxpayers from the pounce of the IT Office. I would request you to go through my problem which is very much exhaustive and moreover disheartening for the busy people like you. I am a retd employee from LIC in the FY 2020/21. In FY 2021/22 I had received arrears of salary along with commutation of pension and leave encashment. The employer while finalizing the IT for 2021/22 had deducted IT giving the exemption for comm pension, 80CC and 80D without the benefit under sec 89. While filing IT I could see the effect of AIS. Without any further deduction except under 80 TTB, I tried to confirm the Total Taxable Income as per 26AS/AIS. The self-assessed tax was to be paid on three dates because of the ATM limit etc. The last payment which was on 28th July, could not be successful and was debited on 29th as a result I could not add the CIN No etc., on the Add box of tax payment. Since the total amount of tax was paid before the last date i.e 31st I did submit a short paid ITR presuming it would be taken care of. On 1st Aug I received a message under sec 143 with a demand due for 4660/. The e-file status was showing the ITR is under process with O/S demand Nil (four Green tick was displayed). Till Aug 30th when I found the ITR is not accepted despite the grievances as cited above, again I paid the balance amount going thru the demand due option, there also I faced the same problem from bank. The amount could be debited on 31St Aug. I did pay the amount thinking the ITR and tax deposit are different Module. Moreover after filing ITR I made a query with the ITO regarding exemption of Transfer grant which should have been allowed at source. They denied it under pretext that no further exemption after filling. In order to see the last payment due appear under SAT head I had submitted a grievance which was not seen till I spoke to the help desk. One reply came with so many tags to file revised IT under section 131 (5). While I visited for re-file, I could see the interest amount along with an increased taxable income thus returned back. Now my questions are: 1. How the taxable income would vary when a letter under 143 is issued with a demand? 2. If I am to re-submit the ITR under Sec 131 (5) can I restrict the taxable income to the earlier one? 3. Can they alter the taxable income when Sec 143 is invoked? 4. Finally, should I conform to the query or wait till they make their earlier demand set right. Sir I had filled it by myself without the help of a professional. Your opinion would be mostly an antidote against the IT virus that has made me upset. Eagerly awaiting your reply.

Bank had auctioned the property of the partnership firm in March,2014, the account of which was declared NPA and possession was with the bank. The auction was challenged in DRT and DRAT and I had to withdraw the case in June 2019. TDS @ 1% amounting to Rs. 266000 was not deposited by the auction purchaser . Instead bank debited this amount to my account without my consent and deposited the TDS in 2016 . Bank wrongly mentioned purchaser pan no. while filling the challan and as such the deduction was not shown in my account. Inspite of repeated request the necessary correction has not got done by the bank. I am deprived of the refund of this amount from the Income tax I am filling the returns with nil income but the TDS is not refunded. what steps can be taken by me

Sir I am Government Servant. My income falls under the IT ceiling and I am paying income tax for last 20 years through my employer as TDS. Recently I received a mail from IT Department regarding outstanding Tax demand for FY 2011-12. On verification of Form26AS downloaded from TRACES, it is observed that my TDS amount is Nil whereas my Form16 clearly show that the TDS amount has been debited from Salary. The consultant who deals with the filing of return advise that I have to pay the demand. Because if he proceed for data correction in 2011-12, the employer will be in problem as there will be several corrections. I cant understand his stand. This is not only my problem. I came to understand that several other employees received similar demands for the periods 2008 to 2012. Please advise