End-to-end IT Refund for Korattur industrial residential mixed establishments — and a zero-penalty filing record
Income Tax Refund for Korattur firms under Chennai North (Ambattur Division) — transparent scope, no surprises, and a filed acknowledgement back to you. Call 9566-068-468.
Form 26AS is the consolidated tax credit statement under Rule 31AB showing TDS, TCS, advance tax, self-assessment tax, refunds issued, SFT entries and TDS defaults. Refund computation under Section 143(1) draws TDS credit from 26AS. Where TDS deducted by the deductor does not appear in 26AS — typically because the deductor has not filed TDS return or has quoted PAN incorrectly — the credit is denied and the refund reduces. Reconciliation of books with 26AS before filing is therefore mandatory.
Fixed fees · Zero hidden charges · Call 9566-068-468 for a custom quote.
Swipe to see all plans
Prices exclude GST. For enterprise pricing, call 9566-068-468.
Expert IT Refund in Korattur — qualified professionals, 15+ years experience, zero-penalty track record.
Where CPC Bengaluru does not act within Citizens Charter timelines, e-Nivaran grievance is filed and escalated through CPCITGRC, Income-tax Ombudsman and CBDT representation till the refund is released.
Where refund is wrongfully withheld and statutory remedies are exhausted, Article 226 writ petition is filed at the Madras HC. Korattur clients have on record successful interim orders directing release with Section 244A interest.
Share your Section 143(1) intimation, Form 26AS, AIS and bank pre-validation screen on WhatsApp at our number — we handle the rest. Korattur clients work with us entirely remotely from review to refund credit.
Each Section 143(1) intimation for Korattur clients is reviewed column-by-column — TDS, advance tax, SA tax, Section 89 relief, Section 90 / 91 FTC and Chapter VI-A deductions reconciled to the return claim before any rectification is filed.
Form 26AS, AIS and TIS are reconciled deductor-by-deductor for Korattur clients. PAN errors in deductor's TDS return are identified and pursued through Section 154 rectification with the original Form 16 / 16A as evidence.
Every Section 154 rectification is filed well within the four-year limitation under Section 154(7) from the end of the FY of the order. Six-month disposal under Section 154(8) is tracked till the rectification order is passed.
Every Income Tax Refund engagement delivers measurable, guaranteed outcomes — expert professionals, on time, every time.
Why this matters here — In Korattur, the cluster of industrial, residential, engineering businesses that defines Korattur's commercial fabric; served by short connections to Ambattur and Padi and onward to central Chennai.
Share documents via WhatsApp to 9566-068-468. No office visit required for Korattur clients.
Miss any of these and the next consequence kicks in automatically.
Deadlines in this neighbourhood — In Korattur, the business activity radiating outward from Korattur Lake and nearby commercial pockets.
Deadline pressure points we see in Korattur: Where Korattur differs: for Korattur units balancing production cycles with monthly GST and quarterly TDS compliance.
Used by entities claiming exemption under Sections 11, 12, 13A, 13B, 10(23C) and similar; refund arises where TDS on interest income or rental income exceeds the entity-level tax after exemption
Filed by the deductor on TRACES to claim refund of tax deducted in excess of liability; supported by an indemnity bond and the CIT(TDS) sanction
Triggered on the e-filing portal after a refund credit failure; requires a pre-validated and EVC-enabled bank account selection from My Bank Account
Standalone refund claim form used prior to the Finance Act 2019 amendment that integrated the refund claim into the return of income; retained for legacy or special-circumstances claims
Filed on the e-filing portal under Services > Rectification to correct an intimation that mis-stated tax credit, denied a deduction or omitted advance-tax payment
Manual application to the jurisdictional authority establishing genuine hardship; supported by reasons explaining the delay and proof of the underlying excess-tax payment
Filed on the e-filing portal under Pending Actions > Response to Outstanding Demand; permits agree, agree-partly or disagree with supporting documents
Escalation channel for refunds determined under Section 143(1) but not credited; raises a ticket against the jurisdictional Pr. CIT and the CPC
Every claim on this page can be traced back to a section or rule below.
Section 237 of the Income-tax Act 1961 establishes the foundational right to a refund. It is to be noted that any person who satisfies the Assessing Officer that the amount of tax paid by him, or on his behalf, or treated as paid by him for any assessment year exceeds the amount with which he is properly chargeable under the Act for that year is entitled to a refund of the excess. The entitlement is statutory and not discretionary; the role of the Assessing Officer is to verify, not to grant ex gratia.
View sourceSub-section (1) of Section 239 provides that every claim for refund under Chapter XIX shall be made by furnishing a return of income in accordance with the provisions of Section 139. The earlier requirement of filing a separate Form 30 stood substituted by the Finance Act 2019 — the return itself is treated as the refund claim. The limitation period is governed by Section 139 — for original returns up to the due date under sub-section (1), and for delayed claims through the updated-return route under sub-section (8A) where eligible. Refund claims outside these timelines require condonation under Section 119(2)(b).
View sourceSection 241A, inserted by the Finance Act 2017, empowers the Assessing Officer to withhold the refund determined under Section 143(1) where the case has been selected for scrutiny under sub-section (2) of Section 143, if the grant of refund is likely to adversely affect the revenue. It is to be noted that the withholding requires the prior approval of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, and reasons in writing must be recorded. The provision is a check on automatic refund release where a scrutiny addition is reasonably anticipated, and the assessee retains the remedy under Section 244A for interest on any refund eventually granted.
View sourceSub-section (1) of Section 244A provides for simple interest at one-half of one percent per month, or part of a month, on the amount of refund. Clause (a) covers refunds arising from any tax collected at source, advance tax or self-assessment tax — interest runs from the first day of April of the assessment year to the date on which the refund is granted, provided the return is furnished within the time prescribed under Section 139(1). Clause (aa) was inserted by the Finance Act 2016 to address refunds out of self-assessment tax, running interest from the date of furnishing of return or date of payment, whichever is later. Clause (b) covers other refunds, with interest from the date of payment of tax.
View sourceSection 245 permits the Assessing Officer, Refund Banker or the Centralised Processing Centre, in lieu of payment of the refund, to set off the amount to be refunded against the sum which remains payable under the Act by the person to whom the refund is due. The first proviso requires an intimation in writing to such person of the action proposed, and the person must be given an opportunity to respond before the adjustment is made. The fifteen-day window for response is administered through Annexure E intimations issued by the CPC. Stale or stayed demands are not eligible for adjustment.
View sourceSub-section (1) of Section 143 prescribes the summary processing under which a refund is ordinarily determined. After the prima-facie adjustments listed in clauses (a) to (d) of the proviso, where the tax credit and self-assessment payments exceed the tax payable on the computed total income, the excess is refundable and an intimation under sub-section (1) is issued. The intimation must be sent before the expiry of nine months from the end of the financial year in which the return was furnished. Failure to issue the intimation within the time limit converts the return acknowledgement itself into an intimation under sub-section (1).
View sourceKorattur sits adjacent to the Ambattur Industrial belt with Lucas-TVS and several engineering units, alongside dense residential pockets. GST filings here often involve B2B engineering supplies, e-way bills and RCM on transport. Korattur (PIN 600080) falls under the Ambattur Division of the Chennai North, the jurisdiction that handles statutory matters for businesses at this PIN. Businesses registered in Korattur share the Chennai North jurisdiction, and their statutory matters route through the same Ambattur Division each time. Every Korattur engagement we open begins with the basics: PIN 600080, the Ambattur Division, and the coordinates 13.1014, 80.1947 that anchor the locality.
Korattur reads as a industrial residential mixed pocket with high commercial activity, anchored around Korattur Industrial Estate and fed by the Korattur Suburban Railway corridor. Document pickup near Korattur Industrial Estate is a same-hour errand for our Korattur engagements rather than the half-day a typical Chennai client expects. The businesses clustered around Korattur Industrial Estate in Korattur drive the bulk of the Income Tax Refund workload we see each cycle. Freight and foot traffic from the Korattur Suburban Railway hub pull steady daily commerce through Korattur, so there is rarely a quiet filing month in this industrial residential mixed pocket.
The engineering firms we serve in Korattur value a IT Refund partner who already understands their sector's compliance rhythm. A engineering operator in Korattur gets a IT Refund workflow shaped by sector norms, not a one-size-fits-all template. Sector concentration matters: when Korattur leans toward engineering, the IT Refund risks cluster around the same few line items each cycle. The business mix in Korattur centres on engineering, and that sector carries its own Income Tax Refund quirks we plan for in advance.
Every IT Refund file we open for Korattur is reconciled, reviewed by a qualified practitioner, and archived for seven years. Our Korattur IT Refund process is built to be predictable, documented, and on time, cycle after cycle. The Korattur Income Tax Refund workflow is documented end-to-end: WhatsApp document intake, a working file, qualified review, and a filed acknowledgement back to you. We keep a repeatable IT Refund checklist for Korattur so nothing in the cycle is improvised or missed.
Income Tax Refund clients in Padi are handled by the same practitioners who run our Korattur desk. Businesses straddling Korattur and Padi get a single IT Refund point of contact rather than two. Serving Korattur and Padi from one team keeps Income Tax Refund turnaround identical across the cluster. From the same Korattur team we also serve Padi and other nearby localities without re-onboarding clients.
Common patterns in the Ambattur Division give Korattur businesses an early-warning map we use to pre-empt IT Refund issues. Sector signals in Korattur — seasonal residential swings and peak-period volumes — shape how we schedule IT Refund work. The Income Tax Refund mistakes we see most in Korattur are avoidable with disciplined intake, which our checklist enforces. Recurring gaps in Korattur residential records are the first thing our Income Tax Refund review closes out.
New engineering ventures in Korattur lean on us to stand up Income Tax Refund correctly before the first deadline rather than after a notice. For a new business incorporating in Korattur or shifting its principal place of business here, Income Tax Refund setup is one of the first things to get right. Relocating a registered office into Korattur (PIN 600080) changes the assessing division, and we handle that Income Tax Refund transition cleanly. First-time Income Tax Refund for a Korattur business is where getting the basics right saves years of cleanup later.
Refund processing, Section 154 rectification, Section 245 set-off reply and Section 244A interest claim for Korattur taxpayers handled by qualified professionals through CPC Bengaluru and the jurisdictional Assessing Officer.
A dedicated refund consultant in Korattur reviews the Section 143(1) intimation, reconciles Form 26AS and AIS, files Section 154 rectification within 4 years, and computes Section 244A interest at 0.5% per month from 1 April of the AY.
Section 245(2) prior intimations are replied within the 21-day window in Korattur, and Section 241A withholding orders during scrutiny are challenged where the recorded reasons do not establish revenue prejudice.
For time-barred refund claims, Section 119(2)(b) condonation is filed under Circular 9/2015 read with Circular 11/2024 before the Pr.CCIT / CCIT / Pr.CIT, and Article 226 writ filed at the Madras HC where the department withholds refund without lawful authority.
Section 139 read with the e-verification rules treats an unverified return as invalid; CPC cannot process an invalid return; verify within 30 days of submission through Aadhaar OTP, net banking, bank EVC or by mailing signed ITR-V to CPC Bengaluru.
Log in to incometax.gov.in, navigate to 'Pending Actions then Worklist', open the Section 245 intimation, mark agreement or disagreement with the outstanding demand within 30 days, upload supporting documents where disputed; non-response is deemed consent.
Yes — file ITR claiming the TDS reflected in Form 16 and Form 26AS against your final liability; the differential is refundable; if employer made excess deduction in March, ensure your return captures the full TDS for credit.
For returns filed within the Section 139(1) due date, average processing in Chennai is 4 to 8 weeks where bank account is pre-validated and no AIS or 26AS mismatch flags exist; complex returns may extend up to 6 months.
Yes — refunds are routed through State Bank of India; track at sbi.co.in/web/personal-banking/track-refund using your PAN and assessment year; the tracker displays whether the refund has been initiated, in transit or credited.
Compare the intimation under Section 143(1) with your ITR computation; identify the differential under heads of TDS, deductions or arithmetic correction; file Section 154 rectification within four years annexing supporting evidence and reconciliation working.
What Korattur clients want to know before signing: Where Korattur differs: in the industrial-residential mixed micro-market of Korattur.
Reading this guide locally — In Korattur, in the industrial-residential mixed micro-market of Korattur.
An income tax refund arises under Section 237 of the Income-tax Act 1961, which provides that where any person satisfies the Assessing Officer that the amount of tax paid by him or on his behalf or treated as paid by him or on his behalf for any assessment year exceeds the amount with which he is properly chargeable under the Act for that year, he shall be entitled to a refund of the excess. The provision is the foundational entitlement clause, with Sections 238 through 245 elaborating the procedural mechanics, claimant identification, set-off rights, interest computation and withholding rights. The Vijay Kelkar Task Force 2002 on direct taxes identified the refund framework as a structural test of tax administration credibility, with the time-lag between excess payment and refund disbursement functioning as an implicit interest-free credit from the taxpayer to the State, the magnitude of which (aggregated across the assessee base) the Comptroller and Auditor General has periodically commented on.
Refund situations arise across multiple structural scenarios. Excess TDS withholding under Section 192 on salary occurs where the employer applies slab-rate deduction without crediting subsequent Chapter VI-A investments by the employee. Excess advance tax under Section 211 occurs where the cumulative instalments at the four prescribed dates exceed the actual self-assessment tax under Section 140A. Excess TDS under Sections 194 to 196D occurs where the payer applies the section-specific rate on gross receipts while the deductee's actual tax liability on net profits is lower. Excess self-assessment tax under Section 140A occurs where the taxpayer over-estimates the liability at the return-filing stage. Section 244A interest is payable on refunds in each of these scenarios, with the interest period commencing from the first day of April of the assessment year for prepaid taxes, and from the date of payment for self-assessment over-payments.
Section 238 prescribes who is entitled to make the refund claim. Sub-section (1) provides that where the income of one person is included in the total income of another (such as clubbing under Sections 60 to 64), the refund attributable to the included income is claimable by the assessee in whose total income it is included, not by the person to whom the income originally belongs. Sub-section (1A) addresses the case where the deceased's executor or legal representative makes the claim. Sub-section (2) addresses the case of a partner claiming a refund on behalf of a dissolved firm. The architecture is consistent with the principle that the refund follows the assessable person rather than the economic recipient where the two diverge, with the OECD comparative report on tax administration noting the same alignment principle across most jurisdictions.
Where the Centralised Processing Centre at Bengaluru denies the refund through a Section 143(1) intimation with prima facie adjustments under Section 143(1)(a), the taxpayer has multiple pathways. First, a response to the intimation within thirty days submitting substantiation through the e-filing portal under the Responses to Outstanding Demands utility. Second, a Section 154 rectification application within four years from the end of the financial year of the order, where the denial arises from a mistake apparent from the record. Third, an appeal under Section 246A to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) within thirty days of the intimation. The CBDT Instruction 1914 dated 2 December 1993 on stay of demand pending appeal provides the procedural framework where the consequential demand needs to be deferred pending appellate decision.
The refund computation under Section 237 operates on the structural identity that the refund equals the aggregate prepaid taxes (TDS plus TCS plus advance tax plus self-assessment tax) minus the final tax liability on the assessed income. The aggregate prepaid taxes are evidenced by Form 26AS entries (TDS and TCS), the advance tax challan acknowledgement numbers under Section 211, and the self-assessment tax challan acknowledgement under Section 140A. The final tax liability is the net of the gross tax on total income, Chapter VIII rebate under Section 87A where applicable, Chapter VIII relief under Sections 89 and 90 where applicable, and the Section 234A, 234B and 234C interest where applicable. The Centralised Processing Centre at Bengaluru operates the computation through the rule-engine that the CBDT periodically updates with Finance Act amendments, with Section 143(1) intimation being the formal communication of the computed refund.
The taxpayer's burden under Section 237 is to satisfy the Assessing Officer that the prepaid taxes exceed the final liability. The substantiation operates through three documentary pillars. First, the Form 26AS download captures the third-party-reported TDS, TCS, advance tax and self-assessment tax aggregate. Second, the Annual Information Statement under CBDT Circular 8/2021 captures the broader transactional universe including securities transactions and other financial-transaction reports. Third, the taxpayer's primary records (bank statements, broker contract notes, Form 16 and Form 16A certificates) substantiate the underlying income and deductions. The three-way reconciliation is the operational best practice that the OECD Forum on Tax Administration 2022 report on pre-filled returns identifies as the principal compliance methodology in jurisdictions transitioning to informational tax bases.
Section 244A(1A) (a separate sub-section from the de-minimis 1A, introduced by Finance Act 2016) provides for additional interest at three percent per annum where the refund arises from an order under Section 250 (Commissioner Appeals) or Section 254 (Income-tax Appellate Tribunal) and the order is not given effect within ninety days from the date of receipt by the Assessing Officer. The provision creates a fiscal incentive for timely effect of appellate orders, addressing the historic concern that successful appellants experienced substantial delays in refund disbursement post-favourable-order. The OECD Forum on Tax Administration 2018 paper on dispute resolution and refund processing referenced the Indian Section 244A(1A) additional-interest provision as a constructive procedural innovation worth comparative study.
Section 244A interest received by the taxpayer is taxable as income from other sources under Section 56(2)(i). The refund-issuing authority does not deduct TDS on the interest at disbursement, since Section 194A excludes income-tax-refund interest from the withholding ambit. The taxpayer is therefore required to disclose the interest in Schedule OS of the return for the assessment year of receipt, with the consequential additional tax liability. The interaction with Section 234B and 234C interest on advance tax shortfall (in the year of interest receipt) requires planning, since the refund-interest swells the taxable income and may itself trigger an advance tax obligation. The Empowered Committee 2009 first discussion paper on tax administration emphasised disclosure-symmetry of refund interest as an integrity component of the broader tax base.
Section 244A operationalises the principle that the taxpayer is entitled to interest on excess prepaid taxes for the period the State has held the funds. Sub-section (1) prescribes the rate at one-half percent per month or part of a month, equating to six percent per annum, on the refund amount. The Vijay Kelkar Task Force 2002 had recommended alignment of refund-interest rates with the Section 234B and 234C demand-interest rates (currently one percent per month, equating to twelve percent per annum), but the Finance Act 2003 settled on the half-of-the-demand-rate compromise that has remained unchanged. The OECD comparative report on tax administration notes that asymmetric interest rates favouring the State are common across jurisdictions, though the Indian gap (twelve versus six percent) is at the wider end of the comparative range.
The Section 241A withholding requires the Assessing Officer to record reasons in writing for forming the opinion that the refund grant is likely to adversely affect revenue, with the prior approval of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner of Income-tax. The procedural safeguards are intended to prevent arbitrary withholding, with the taxpayer entitled to receive a copy of the withholding intimation. The Madras High Court and Bombay High Court have both, in writ jurisdiction under Article 226, addressed challenges to Section 241A withholding orders where the reasons recorded fall short of the adverse-revenue threshold, with the courts setting aside mechanical or insufficiently-reasoned withholding orders. The judicial review jurisdiction provides the principal safeguard against routine application of the withholding power.
Where the Section 241A withholding is subsequently shown to have been unjustified by the eventual assessment confirming the refund, the Section 244A interest period continues to run through the withholding window, with the resulting compounding effect on the eventual refund disbursement. The taxpayer's economic position is therefore restored in interest terms, though the cash-flow opportunity cost during the withholding period is irrecoverable. The OECD Forum on Tax Administration 2018 paper on refund withholding identifies the Indian Section 241A architecture as a balanced model that combines revenue-protection with interest-restoration, though the discretionary nature of the adverse-revenue test continues to attract critique in academic commentary on tax administration design.
The taxpayer subjected to a Section 241A withholding order has multiple remedies. First, representation to the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner who granted the approval, on the merits of the underlying assessment likelihood. Second, writ petition before the High Court under Article 226 challenging the withholding order on the grounds of mechanical reasons or absence of the adverse-revenue threshold. Third, expediting the Section 143(2) assessment cooperation to accelerate the withholding-release. The Section 153 outer limit on assessment completion (twenty-one months from the end of the assessment year) functions as the structural backstop on the withholding period, with the refund disbursement following automatic on assessment completion in the absence of a confirmed demand.
What Korattur clients usually ask next: Where Korattur differs: for Korattur units balancing production cycles with monthly GST and quarterly TDS compliance.
Form 24Q is the quarterly TDS return that every salary-paying employer must file under Rule 31A for tax deducted under Section 192 from salaries. Quarterly filing populates the employee's Form 26AS within the next reporting cycle. Failure or delay by the deductor in filing Form 24Q causes TDS to not appear in the employee's 26AS, blocking the refund claim at Section 143(1) processing despite a valid Form 16.
CBDT Instruction 275/29/2014-IT(B) directs Assessing Officers and CPC that TDS credit reflected in the taxpayer's Form 16 or Form 16A must be granted to the assessee even where the corresponding entry is missing in Form 26AS due to the deductor's default in filing the quarterly TDS return. The instruction operationalises the principle in Court On Its Own Motion v. CIT (Delhi HC 2013) and is the strongest written authority for refund claims blocked by deductor non-compliance.
Rule 128 of the Income-tax Rules prescribes the manner of granting foreign tax credit under Section 90, 90A or 91. Sub-rule (9) requires Form 67 to be filed before the end of the assessment year (post amendment by Notification 100/2022); pre-amendment it had to be filed by the return due date. Form 67 must precede Schedule TR claims in the return to avoid Section 143(1)(a) FTC disallowance.
Article 226 of the Constitution empowers a High Court to issue writs including mandamus directing release of a wrongfully withheld refund where statutory remedies are exhausted or are not efficacious. Madras HC and other High Courts have repeatedly granted interim mandamus directing CPC and the AO to release refunds with Section 244A interest where Section 241A withholdings have been kept alive without recorded reasons.
Refund is the amount returned by the income-tax department to the taxpayer where the aggregate of tax deducted at source, tax collected at source, advance tax and self-assessment tax exceeds the tax properly chargeable for the assessment year. The right to refund is conferred by Section 237 of the Income-tax Act 1961, and the quantum is determined either by summary processing under Section 143(1) or by regular assessment.
Section 244A interest is the simple interest payable by the department on a refund granted to the assessee, at one-half of one percent per month or part of a month. The interest runs from 1 April of the assessment year for refunds out of TDS, TCS and advance tax, provided the return is furnished within the Section 139(1) due date; otherwise it runs from the date of furnishing.
Section 245 set-off is the statutory adjustment of a determined refund against any sum remaining payable by the assessee under the Act. The first proviso requires a written intimation listing the demand sought to be adjusted, and the assessee is allowed thirty days to respond on the e-filing portal before the adjustment is finalised.
Refund Banker is State Bank of India, designated by the Central Board of Direct Taxes under Notification 70 of 2017 to disburse income-tax refunds through ECS or NEFT to the pre-validated bank account of the taxpayer. The bank pushes credits on the basis of refund advice generated by CPC Bengaluru and reports failed credits with prescribed reason codes.
Intimation under Section 143(1) is the document issued by CPC Bengaluru on completion of summary processing of the return. It states the income computed after prima-facie adjustments, the tax determined, the credit allowed and the refund or demand resulting. The intimation is deemed appealable under Section 246A and rectifiable under Section 154.
Form 26AS is the tax credit statement maintained on the TRACES platform under Rule 31AB. It consolidates TDS deducted by deductors, TCS collected, advance and self-assessment tax paid, refund issued, SFT entries and other tax-relevant data. Reconciliation of Form 26AS with the return is the first step in refund-claim verification.
Annual Information Statement is the wider compliance statement introduced by CBDT Circular 8 of 2021, displaying information from multiple sources — banks, mutual funds, registrars, foreign remittance reporters and others. AIS feedback by the taxpayer flows back to the reporting entity; unresolved AIS variances drive Section 143(1)(a)(iii) adjustments that depress refund quantum.
Taxpayer Information Summary is the category-wise aggregation of AIS entries displayed on the compliance portal. It computes processed and derived values that feed pre-filled return fields. Discrepancies between TIS and the values claimed in the return often surface as summary-processing adjustments to the refund.
Numerical examples showing tax + interest + penalty across common default scenarios.
How Korattur businesses typically avoid these: Where Korattur differs: the cluster of industrial, residential, engineering businesses that defines Korattur's commercial fabric. We see for Korattur units balancing production cycles with monthly GST and quarterly TDS compliance.
How the local trade mix shapes this — In Korattur, the cluster of industrial, residential, engineering businesses that defines Korattur's commercial fabric.
Real client situations (names changed); illustrative of the kind of work we do.
Why these Korattur engagements look the way they do: Where Korattur differs: the business activity radiating outward from Korattur Lake and nearby commercial pockets. We see for Korattur units balancing production cycles with monthly GST and quarterly TDS compliance.
“My AY 2022-23 refund of ₹1.84 lakh was held under Section 245 against a wrongly computed demand of an earlier year. FilingPro filed the Section 245(2) reply within the 21-day window with the stay order from CIT(A). Refund credited within 6 weeks with full Section 244A interest. Surgical work.”
“TDS of ₹47,500 deducted by my tenant did not reflect in Form 26AS because they had quoted my PAN incorrectly. CPC denied the credit in the Section 143(1) intimation. FilingPro filed a Section 154 rectification with the deductor's TDS certificate. Refund recomputed and credited in 11 weeks.”
“My refund kept failing for three reissue attempts because my bank account had become PAN-de-linked after the Aadhaar-PAN deadline. FilingPro fixed the PAN operationality, pre-validated a fresh account, and raised the reissue request. Refund credited the very next cycle.”
“For AY 2017-18 the return was missed. Refund of ₹62,000 was clearly due based on Form 16 TDS. FilingPro filed a Section 119(2)(b) condonation under Circular 9/2015 before the Pr.CIT explaining the bona fide hardship. Condonation was granted, return filed, refund received with interest. Outstanding work.”
“Refund of ₹2.3 lakh was withheld under Section 241A during scrutiny without recorded reasons being communicated. FilingPro filed a writ petition before the Madras HC. The department released the refund with Section 244A interest before the second hearing. Strong professional advocacy.”
“My Section 143(1) intimation showed an addition under Section 143(1)(a)(vi) for an AIS entry that was actually duplicated. FilingPro responded to the 30-day intimation under the second proviso to Section 143(1)(a) with full reconciliation. The adjustment was dropped and the original refund of ₹1.12 lakh was issued.”
Common questions from Korattur clients. Call 9566-068-468 for specific queries.
We serve businesses in every part of Korattur, from Park Road, SIDCO Industrial Road, Chennai - Tiruttani - Renigunta Road, Jawaharlal Nehru Road (100 Feet Road) and New Avadi Road to the East Avenue Road, East avenue Road, Konnur High Road and 13th Main Road commercial pockets, with IT Refund handled end to end.
Professional Income Tax Refund in Korattur, Chennai. Call @ 9566-068-468. Offices at Maduravoyal, Nerkundram & Nolambur (upcoming). 15+ years experience, 4.9★ rated.
FilingPro Chennai — 15+ Years of Expert Tax & Business Consulting. Offices at Maduravoyal, Nerkundram & Nolambur (upcoming), Chennai. Call @ 9566-068-468. Disclaimer: Information on this page is for general guidance only and does not constitute legal, financial or tax advice. Consult a qualified professional for specific advice.