Quick answer. If your ITR refund is still pending after the return has been processed, or you have received an intimation under §143(1), a demand under §156, a scrutiny notice under §143(2), a defective-return notice under §139(9), or an adjustment notice under §245, you have a five-step rescue path. Log in to the e-Filing portal at incometax.gov.in, download the intimation PDF, reconcile your Form 16, Form 26AS, AIS and TIS, file an e-Nivaran grievance with category CPC-ITR or AO, and if there is no movement in 30 days escalate to CPGRAMS at pgportal.gov.in. Refunds carry statutory interest at 0.5 percent per month under §244A of the Income-tax Act 1961. A §245 adjustment cannot be enforced without a 30-day prior intimation and your objection on record. Faceless appeals under the Faceless Appeal Scheme 2021 must be filed within 30 days on the same portal.
Short on time? Jump to the first 30-minute action plan or the six-tier ladder.
If you opened this page because the bank account in your ITR has not been credited, or because a demand of a few thousand rupees has suddenly appeared on the e-Filing dashboard, the section you actually need is the action plan below; everything else is supporting context that you can read in any order.
Every monsoon, the Income-tax Department processes roughly 7 crore returns, and a sizeable fraction get held up: refund stuck after processing, refund failed at bank validation, demand raised on a 26AS mismatch, scrutiny picked up by the CASS (Computer Assisted Scrutiny Selection) system, or a defective-return flag fired by the e-Filing portal. The citizen-side path is well-defined but not well-advertised. This page sets it out in plain Indian English with statutory citations, sample text you can copy, and the exact category names you need to pick inside e-Nivaran and CPGRAMS.
The guide assumes no prior tax knowledge. If a section is more than you need, skip it and move to the action plan.
Case study (anonymised). A salaried filer in Pune, [Name], filed ITR-1 in late July for assessment year 2025-26 claiming a refund of Rs 38,420. The return was processed on 11 September with a notice of intimation under §143(1). The intimation showed no refund and no demand. Two months later, on a routine e-Filing login, the dashboard showed a demand of Rs 14,260 raised “as per CPC computation”. No fresh notice had reached the registered email. On reconciling Form 16 against Form 26AS, [Name] found that the employer had deducted TDS of Rs 27,000 in March but had deposited only Rs 13,000 with the government. The CPC computation had therefore allowed only the credit visible in 26AS, raised a demand for the balance, and silently adjusted the original refund of Rs 38,420 against this demand under §245. [Name] had received no §245 30-day notice. Total recovery time once the right path was followed: 43 days. Tools used: e-Filing grievance, e-Nivaran, a CIT-TDS complaint against the employer, and a §154 rectification request. Refund actually credited: Rs 38,420 plus §244A interest of Rs 1,153.
The case is representative. The headline lesson is that the dashboard demand and the refund adjustment can both happen without a clean paper trail reaching the taxpayer, and the rescue is procedural, not political.
Set a timer for 30 minutes. Do these eight things in order before you do anything else.
If you complete those eight steps you will already have the entire evidence pack needed for any complaint, appeal or rectification you might file in the next 90 days.
Each item below pairs the symptom with the statutory hook and the correct counter-move.
Symptom. Refund “Issued” but not credited; dashboard shows “Refund Failure” or “Bank account validation pending”. Cause. The name on the bank account does not match the name on PAN, or the IFSC has changed after a bank merger, or the account is not pre-validated and EVC-enabled. Counter. Under Profile > My Bank Account, add or revalidate the correct account; mark it as nominated for refund. Then file an e-Nivaran under Refund > Refund Reissue Request.
Symptom. Refund determined in the §143(1) PDF, but a different (smaller) amount or nothing is actually credited. Dashboard shows an “Outstanding Demand” from an earlier assessment year. Cause. CPC has invoked §245 of the Income-tax Act 1961, which permits set-off of refund against any sum payable. Counter. §245 is conditional. CPC is required to issue a prior intimation in writing and give you 30 days to object. If you can show that no such intimation was served, the adjustment is procedurally bad. File an e-Nivaran under CPC > §245 Adjustment quoting the assessment-year numbers and asking for a copy of the §245 intimation. If the underlying demand itself is wrong, file a §154 rectification in parallel.
Symptom. Status shows “Defective”; you have a 15-day window from receipt of the notice. Cause. Common defects: tax payable shown but challan not paid, books not maintained but P&L claimed, audit-report mismatch, salary-head box left blank, or ITR-1 used where ITR-2 was required. Counter. Under e-File > Response to Notice u/s 139(9), accept or disagree, and upload a corrected JSON of the return. Missing the 15-day window converts the return to invalid under §139(9) proviso, which means it is treated as if you never filed; reopen via §119(2)(b) condonation if the window has lapsed.
Symptom. Demand line says “Tax payable as per §143(1)”. Cause. TDS claimed in the return is higher than what is reflected in 26AS at the time of processing. Counter. If 26AS has since been corrected, file a §154 rectification under “Tax credit mismatch correction” with the latest 26AS attached. If the deductor (usually employer or bank) has not deposited, see item 5.
Symptom. Form 16 shows TDS of Rs X; Form 26AS shows Rs Y where Y is less than X. Cause. Employer deducted but did not remit, or filed Form 24Q late, or quoted wrong PAN. Counter. This is a violation of §200 and §206 of the Income-tax Act 1961, and the employer is liable for interest under §201(1A). Citizen route: file a complaint with the CIT-TDS of your range at tdscpc.gov.in (TRACES) under Tax Payer > Statements / Payments > Request for Form 26AS Correction and a parallel grievance on e-Nivaran under TDS > Mismatch. The Department is empowered to recover the short deposit from the employer; you cannot be denied credit if you have proof of deduction (Supreme Court principle in the Hindustan Coca Cola line).
Symptom. Intimation shows lower deduction than what you claimed. Cause. Mismatch between return entry and information visible in AIS, or claim crossed pre-set thresholds (rent above Rs 1 lakh annually without landlord PAN, mediclaim above Rs 25,000/50,000 limits). Counter. File a §154 rectification with rent receipts, PAN of landlord (mandatory if annual rent exceeds Rs 1 lakh), 80C investment proofs and 80D mediclaim receipts attached.
Symptom. Salary reported but CPC classified part as “Other Sources” or “Business and Profession”. Cause. Mismatch between Form 16 issued by employer and the AIS feed from the same employer, or contractual payment treated as Section 194J. Counter. Rectification under §154; if the underlying Form 16/26AS is the problem, raise a deductor-level complaint via TRACES.
Symptom. STCG or LTCG figure in intimation is different from your computation. Cause. Broker statement mismatch (STT, indexation, grandfathering for pre-31-Jan-2018 equity). Counter. §154 rectification with the broker's AIS feed reconciliation report; for genuine LTCG above Rs 1.25 lakh under §112A (post Finance Act 2024) the system applies the 12.5 percent rate without indexation, which is the current regime.
Symptom. Scrutiny under §143(2) or reassessment under §148 referencing Schedule FA omissions or RSU/ESOP grants. Cause. Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) Act 2015 imposes a flat 30 percent plus penalty on undisclosed foreign assets; even a forgotten employer-stock vest can trigger this. Counter. File a comprehensive response on the e-Proceedings tab with broker statements, vest schedules and FMV calculations. Consider professional help here; the Black Money Act is not the place to wing it.
Symptom. Notice referring to “information suggesting income has escaped assessment”. Cause. AIS-driven flag (property purchase, bank deposit, crypto receipt) cross-referenced against the original ITR. Counter. First receive the §148A(b) show-cause and the information annexure; respond within the seven-day window with the bank and property paper trail. The §148A path was added by Finance Act 2021 and refined by Finance Act 2024; you have a right to a reasoned order under §148A(d) before any §148 notice can issue.
Symptom. You paid the demand by net banking; receipt has a CIN; portal still shows the demand outstanding. Cause. Challan-Identification-Number not posted to the assessment year because of wrong major head or wrong AY chosen at payment time. Counter. Use e-Pay Tax > Challan Correction within the portal; or write to the assessing officer with a copy of the bank's CIN advice and ask for §154 rectification of the demand entry.
Symptom. Refund “issued” but bank statement shows nothing; bank has bounced the credit. Cause. Pre-validated account closed or KYC frozen. Counter. Add a fresh pre-validated account, EVC-enable it, and submit a Refund Reissue Request under e-File > Refund Reissue.
If the response is not satisfactory at one tier, escalate to the next. Do not skip; the senior tier will ask for the previous reference number.
Path: e-Filing portal > Grievances > Submit Grievance. Pick Department of Income-tax (CPC) for return-processing issues, AO for assessment-stage issues, CPC-TDS for TDS or 26AS mismatch, Refund Banker for failed credits. The acknowledgement number begins with the letter A.
Path: incometax.gov.in/iec/foportal/help/e-Nivaran or the e-Nivaran tile after login. This is the Department's own integrated grievance redressal mechanism, routed automatically to the correct CPC, AO or RCC.
Path: pgportal.gov.in > Lodge Public Grievance > Pick Department of Revenue or Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT). CPGRAMS is operated by the Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances (DARPG); its 30-day service standard is enforced via the Sevottam framework. Useful when the Department itself is non-responsive on the in-house tiers.
Find your AO under e-Filing > Profile > Jurisdictional AO. Write a physical letter (or upload via e-Proceedings) seeking a personal hearing; this matters in scrutiny, defective-return and §148 cases where the matter is not purely CPC-controlled. A parallel §154 rectification request can be filed online.
Path: e-Filing > e-File > Income Tax Forms > File Form 35 within 30 days of receipt of the order. The Faceless Appeal Scheme 2021 (issued under §250(6B)) routes appeals to a centrally allocated officer; no physical hearing is required and video hearing is on request. Fees range from Rs 250 to Rs 1,000 depending on assessed income.
If you lose at CIT(A), file Form 36 before the ITAT within 60 days. Fees are Rs 500 to Rs 10,000 by income slab. Tribunal benches sit in 28 cities. ITAT orders are final on facts; only a substantial question of law goes higher to the High Court under §260A.
Choose Category: Income-tax > Refund / Demand, Sub-category: Refund Adjusted u/s 245 without prior intimation (or whichever matches), then paste the body below.
To, Centralised Processing Centre, Income-tax Department, Bengaluru. Subject: Grievance against refund adjustment under §245 / demand under §143(1) Assessment Year: 2025-26 PAN: ABCDE1234F Acknowledgement number of return: 123456789010725 Intimation reference: CPC/2526/A1/123456789 Sir/Madam, 1. I filed my return of income for AY 2025-26 on [date] claiming a refund of Rs 38,420. 2. The return was processed on [date] vide intimation under §143(1) (copy attached). 3. The e-Filing dashboard now reflects an outstanding demand of Rs 14,260 for AY [year], and a corresponding adjustment under §245 against the refund determined for AY 2025-26. 4. I have not received any prior intimation under §245 either by email or on the portal, as mandated by the proviso to §245 of the Income-tax Act 1961. 5. On reconciliation, the demand arises from a shortfall in TDS credit reflected in Form 26AS, even though my Form 16 reflects full deduction by the employer. 6. I request that: (a) the §245 adjustment be reversed pending issue of a proper prior intimation and disposal of my objections, (b) the refund of Rs 38,420 along with interest under §244A be released to the pre-validated bank account on file, (c) the demand for AY [year] be rectified under §154 to reflect the correct TDS credit. Documents attached: Form 16, Form 26AS (latest), §143(1) intimation, bank validation status, dashboard screenshot. Yours faithfully, [Name] [Address] [Mobile, email]
Path: e-Filing > Services > Rectification > Request Type: Tax Credit Mismatch Correction.
Rectification of intimation under §143(1) for AY 2025-26 PAN: ABCDE1234F Intimation reference: CPC/2526/A1/123456789 The intimation has allowed TDS credit of Rs 13,000 against Form 26AS, whereas the actual TDS deducted by the employer as per Form 16 is Rs 27,000. The shortfall in 26AS is on account of non-deposit / delayed deposit by the employer, for which a parallel complaint has been filed before the CIT-TDS (acknowledgement [ ]) and on TRACES. Without prejudice to the recovery proceedings against the deductor, the taxpayer is entitled to full credit in line with the principle that the deductee cannot be denied credit for taxes deducted by the deductor (Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt Ltd v. CIT line of authority). Relief sought: full TDS credit of Rs 27,000, deletion of demand of Rs 14,260, release of refund of Rs 38,420 with §244A interest.
For Form 35 before the faceless CIT(A); add as many grounds as apply.
1. The learned Assessing Officer erred in law and in fact in confirming the addition of Rs [ ] under [head], without considering the documentary evidence on record. 2. The learned AO erred in not granting the full credit of TDS of Rs [ ] reflected in Form 16, contrary to the principle that credit cannot be denied where deduction is established. 3. The learned AO failed to record cogent reasons for invoking §[ ] of the Income-tax Act 1961, in violation of the requirements of the Faceless Assessment Scheme 2019. 4. The learned AO erred in confirming the §245 adjustment without prior intimation, in breach of the statutory pre-condition under the first proviso to §245. 5. The order is bad in law, contrary to the principles of natural justice, and is liable to be quashed. The Appellant prays that the order under §143(3) / §143(1) / §154 dated [ ] be set aside and the consequential refund of Rs [ ] together with interest under §244A be directed to be released.
Keep one folder per assessment year. Bare minimum:
Senior citizens get a higher basic exemption (Rs 3 lakh; Rs 5 lakh for very-senior 80+). Refunds in senior-citizen cases are notionally prioritised under CBDT instructions. A senior-citizen filer can also bypass certain compliance steps: no advance-tax obligation under §207(2) if there is no business or professional income.
NRIs file ITR-2 or ITR-3 as applicable; refunds get parked in an NRO account that must be pre-validated. AIS-driven mismatches are common because of TDS at 30 percent on rent and 20 percent on listed equities for NRIs (subject to DTAA relief). Use Form 10F plus the Tax Residency Certificate to claim treaty benefit; without these the refund will be denied.
HUF files ITR-2 or ITR-3 with the karta's PAN as the authorised representative. Refund credits to an HUF bank account; the HUF PAN must be pre-validated separately.
ITR-5; refunds get credited to the firm's current account. AIS-feed mismatch is a frequent CPC trigger because partner remuneration and interest on capital are reported in AIS feeds.
Use ITR-3 (or ITR-4 if presumptive). Common defect: claiming salary deduction in ITR-4 (which is not allowed in presumptive scheme for business income). Refund delays here are almost always defect-driven; address the defect first, then escalate.
Where the Income-tax Department is unresponsive, the RTI Act 2005 can extract paper records that the e-Nivaran tier cannot. Typical asks under §6(1) of the RTI Act: copy of the §245 prior-intimation said to have been served, copy of the assessment record, copy of file noting in the rectification application, list of pending rectifications in the relevant range. The PIO of every Income-tax range is identifiable from the Department's directory page. For drafting, use the AI RTI Draft tool and check the reply with the PIO Reply Checker.
Once the §143(1) intimation determines a refund, CPC issues the refund order to the State Bank of India refund banker, which credits the pre-validated account within 7 to 30 working days. If the account is pre-validated and EVC-enabled and no §245 adjustment is in play, expect credit within two weeks of the intimation date. Beyond that, file an e-Nivaran under Refund > Status / Reissue.
Your Form 26AS will show short or zero credit even though Form 16 shows a deduction. File a complaint with the CIT-TDS of your range and a parallel grievance on e-Nivaran under TDS > Non-deposit by deductor. The Department is empowered to recover from the deductor under §201; you cannot be denied credit if you have Form 16 in hand, and the Supreme Court has consistently affirmed that the burden falls on the deductor.
For intimations under §143(1) issued by CPC, file rectification online at e-Filing > Services > Rectification. For orders passed by a jurisdictional AO under §143(3) or §147, the rectification is filed with the AO (uploaded via e-Proceedings). The online route is the default; visit only when the AO's record is the source of the problem.
Yes for almost all first appeals against orders of an AO. The Faceless Appeal Scheme 2021 is the standing procedure; only a narrow set of exceptions (search and seizure, international tax in specific cases) goes to a traditional CIT(A). File Form 35 within 30 days; the system allocates a faceless CIT(A) and conducts the appeal in writing with optional video hearing.
e-Nivaran is the Income-tax Department's internal grievance portal, integrated with CPC, AO and TRACES. CPGRAMS at pgportal.gov.in is the central government cross-ministry grievance system run by DARPG. The two run in parallel; e-Nivaran is faster for purely tax-procedural issues; CPGRAMS adds external pressure when the Department itself is the problem. Use e-Nivaran first; escalate to CPGRAMS if there is no movement in 30 days.
No. §245 requires a prior intimation in writing and a 30-day window to object. Adjustment without intimation has been held bad in law by the Delhi and Bombay High Courts in successive matters. If you can show non-service, e-Nivaran is the right venue, and CPGRAMS the escalation.
You can appeal without payment; appeal does not by itself stay the demand. To prevent enforcement, file a §220(6) stay application with the AO. CBDT practice direction expects you to deposit 20 percent of the disputed demand for stay; genuine hardship cases obtain full stay.
Yes, with a condonation of delay prayer in Form 35 setting out reasons. CIT(A) has discretion to condone delays for sufficient cause; medical, family or postal failure reasons are commonly accepted.
Pre-validate a working account under Profile > My Bank Account, mark it as nominated for refund, and submit a Refund Reissue Request at e-File > Refund Reissue. The refund will be issued afresh, usually within 30 days.
Yes, §244A mandates simple interest at 0.5 percent per month on the refund amount from 1 April of the assessment year (or the date of payment of tax, whichever is later) up to the date of grant of refund. CPC computes this automatically; if the interest figure is short, file a §154 rectification.
Ignoring §148A is the worst option. The AO can pass an order under §148A(d) on whatever material is on file, issue a §148 notice, and reassess income with penalty and interest. Always respond within the seven-day window, even if only to ask for an extension and the underlying information annexure.
Last reviewed by RTI Wiki editorial team on 2026-05-16.