Disposal of Grievances Appraisal of various

Grievance Redressal
Mechanisms (GRM)
in Income Tax Department
(ITD)
Presentation by PCCIT, Pune

Grievance Redressal Mechanism (GRM)in ITD
- Centralized Public Grievance Redress and
Monitoring System (CPGRAMS) Grievances
-Aayakar Seva Kendra (ASK) Grievance
Filing of grievance petitions with various I.Tax Authorities
where ASK is operational

-Non-ASK Grievance
Filing of grievance petitions with various I.Tax Authorities
where ASK is not operational

-Ombudsman

CPGRAMS


Its is an online internet based facility for citizens to lodge their
grievances
Web address : http://pgportal.gov.in, www.darpg.nic.in .
Effective tool for monitoring of redress of grievance received
through the Grievance Redress Mechanism, established in
Government of India.
The System networks all Central Ministries / Departments /
Organizations.
On lodging the complaint, a unique registration number is
generated which can be used for further reference and
checking the progress.
Reports can be generated from the system for analyzing
grievance prone areas for taking remedial action and
prevention in future.

CPGRAMS-Log in screen

New Grievances .CPGRAMS.

Disposed Grievances .CPGRAMS.

Input by Citizen .CPGRAMS.

CPGRAMS-Grievance Redressal Process-1/4 .

CPGRAMS-Grievance Redressal Process-2/4 .

CPGRAMS-Grievance Redressal Process-3/4 .

CPGRAMS-Grievance Redressal Process-4/4 .

.

Grievances and Others.T returns .ASK interface with taxpayers is by Front Desk.ASK provides for distribution of DAK and returns to the Assessing Officers (AOs) and other offices.The ASK Software is installed at the ASK Centers for centralized receipt & registration of DAK and I. The tracking of DAK resolution is possible through integration with iTaxnet. . It is further subcategorised in 16 subcategories for which time limits have been set by Citizen Charter.Aayakar Seva Kendra (ASK) . Dak in which the time limit stipulated in Citizen Charter has been exceeded.Back Desk classifies the dak in various categoriesCitizen Charter. . . is classified as ‘Grievance’.

ASK-Entry Screen for Front Desk .

Home Screen for AO .ASK .

ASK-Details of Docs on clicking ‘Search’ .

ASK-Various categories in ‘Grievance’ .

CsIT to CBDT .ASK-Monitoring by Addl.

ASK-Grievance-Sub-category-wise .

◦ suggest remedial measures for redressal of grievances. provided that in the event of failure of such authority to comply with the requisition without any sufficient cause. GOI and the Chairman CBDT for appropriate action against erring officials. if provided or copies if furnished. ◦ require the Income Tax Authority complained against or any other related Income Tax Authority to provide any information or furnish certified copies of any document relating to the subject matter of the complaint which is or is alleged to be in its possession. if he deems fit.. . draw the inference that the information. the Ombudsman may. through conciliation and mediation between the Income Tax Department and the aggrieved parties or by passing an ‘award’ in accordance with the Guidelines. Department of Revenue. and ◦ report his findings to the Secretary. would be unfavourable to the concerned Income Tax Authority. ◦ consider such complaints and facilitate their satisfaction or settlement by agreement.Ombudsman The Ombudsman has the powers to— ◦ receive complaints from taxpayers on any matters viz.

Model Grievance Redressal Mechanism .

Taxpayer’s email is captured and hence he can be contacted by email if any further input is required.  The input should be in a form which can be forwarded to any persons with ease.  On all the above parameters.All contact details of taxpayer should be captured so that taxpayer can be contacted by email.  by scanning of documents submitted by taxpayer which can be stored physically at one place and scanned documents may be visible to all concerned authorities as well as to their supervisory authorities. Taxpayer can also upload a document to support the grievance which is visible to every authority to which the grievance is forwarded at any point of time.Input acceptance .  ASK can be improved by  encouraging taxpayers to provide email for faster communication  by allowing various officers to send email to the taxpayer (for seeking any further clarification/ details) from within the ASK system. CPGRAMS scores over ASK as the taxpayer writes a gist of grievance. . Comments sent to the user should be available both in ASK system and email but taxpayer should be able to provide input through ASK system. phone and by letter.The taxpayer should be able to give subject and gist of grievance .

Both CPGRAMS and ASK give unique tracking number.  . this is not possible in ASK. taxpayer can check the status of grievance at any point of time and can give even further comment and input (which are visible to all the authorities linked with the grievance) till the time grievance is closed. However. it is possible to view the process and also comment on the same. There is no facility to the user to find out the process by which grievance is being handled.Acknowledgement & Status Tracking Taxpayers tend to develop much greater confidence in the grievance redressal mechanism if they are given a formal acknowledgement and unique tracking numbers. In CPGRAMS. In CPGRAMS. These may be used by taxpayers to check status of action taken on their complaint. . Taxpayer has to approach the officer for finding out the status and reasons for delay.

g. If the system requires input from an expert. It should also be possible to forward the grievance to multiple authorities for action. There is no system to forward the grievance to a higher authority with remarks in respect of problems faced. Model systems also keep all the documents in electronic form so that the documents can be forwarded to the concerned authority instantly. These systems have all the authorities connected with the system so that any authority can be asked to view and give comments. one AO has to transfer PAN. one CIT has to approve it after NOC from another CIT. But the same have not been added. grievances can only be transferred to the officers in the same building but letter has to move physically. DIT Systems. Some grievances required remedial action by multiple authorities (e. and then redirect each to their relevant executive(s) instantly. . CPC. CPGRAMS allows any authority to forward the grievance to any authority under CBDT (e. another AO has to process it. However. CPGRAMS has functionality to add categories by every user. In ASK. Range head has to approve the refund). CPGRAMS has this functionality but ASK does not have. the document in electronic form is easily available to any person linked with that thread. the category-wise report is not getting generated properly. This functionality can be added to so that data analysis of grievances in various categories can be carried out.Classification & Forwarding     Smarter systems sort grievances based on their classification. ASK has 16 subcategories in ‘Citizen Charter’ & ‘Grievance’. other CIT charges) through proper channel. This is not possible in ASK.g.

only number can be seen. After classification of grievances and fixing of timeline for action. In ASK. Only when an authority examines the pendency of its subordinates. the matter is promoted to the officer next in line in seniority. In CPGRAMS.Escalation   In Smart systems. organizations configure typical action time for each type of complaint. In rest of the categories. the grievances pending for more than 60 days are flagged red. Further categories of ‘> 6 moths’ and ‘> 1 year’ should be made available in ASK. as well as set up the hierarchy for escalation. most of the pendency is in the category ‘> 60 days’. both CPGRAMS and ASK do not escalate the matter to a higher level automatically if action is not completed in time. By issuing ‘Citizen Charter’. When an executive fails to take corrective action in time. it is easily possible to make such grievances visible in a separate folder (just like ‘New Grievances’ in CPGRAMS) to the next higher authority. However. ITD has committed to adhere to certain timelines in taking action in 16 categories of cases. the list of grievances is available only in respect of grievances pending for more than 6 months and 1 year. it comes across the cases where timely action has not been taken. In CPGRAMS. .

Same can be done in ASK. if refund issued is less than the amount specified by the taxpayer in his grievances. it is easily possible for supervisory authorities to monitor and guide the AO as the comments are forwarded through them. CBDT sends a communication to taxpayer on the system. Further. Reasons for delay in action wherever possible should also be given. In CPGRAMS.g. . however. System is in place for the same. final comments on the grievance should also detail the reasons for variance from the expected outcome by the taxpayer. They also analyse whether the grievance has been fully redressed or there is any variation because of any reason. the same is visible to taxpayer only when he logs in. In CPGRAMS. e. the reasons for the same should be given. as marked by the executive in charge. the authorities need to be trained in giving proper comments. However. It will be better if system based email and sms alerts are issued to the taxpayer informing him of resolution of grievance and asking him to check the same on the portal.Action & its Notification    Smart systems alert the taxpayer immediately upon completion of action.

or be forwarded to a more senior officer in escalated form.g. only properly redressed grievances are closed. the power of closure is vested with CBDT. asking the taxpayer to approach deductor. In CPGRAMS.Verification by Taxpayer    In model systems. However. the better course may be to revive the grievance as it will enable all authorities to view prior history of actions taken and problems faced. transfer to another authority for action. Hence. Should it not be. in ASK. the feedback is treated as new grievance if the grievance has been closed by CBDT. In CPGRAMS. if a person is not satisfied with the action taken on grievance. taxpayer may be asked whether the corrective action taken on their grievance satisfies them or is not substantial enough. the grievances are closed even if not redressed e. in absence of monitoring of grievance redressal process by supervisory authority. However. the complaint may be marked as pending again. .

there is no mechanism for an authority to analyse the process of grievance redressal and suggest whether the failure was instance specific or whether it required system improvement. If systemic failure is pointed out. The authority settling the grievance should be asked this feedback at the time of settling the grievance.Systemic Improvement   A grievance points out to a failure to deliver the desired outcome. the brief description of the modification required in the system along with the details of authority who can take steps to resolve it should be given. Good systems allow for improvement of the system by learning from the same.) or it may be systemic. That failure may be instance specific (caused by negligence etc. In both CPGRAMS and ASK. .

Model Grievance Redressal Mechanism .

Grievances-Suitably handled by ASK & CPGRAMS .

Grievances-Suitably handled by Ombudsman .

of Griev. 1 2 3 Reasons Category No. on cheque No action on revised return TDS Others Others 2 2 2 8 11 12 No credit of TDS Wrong demand uploaded on system leading to refund adj.Analysis of grievances in CPGRAMS-1/3 .Analysis of pending grievances in CPGRAMS at Pune shows following reasons for grievances:No. . no records available with department Refund 2 9 No processing in AST.refund Appeal effect delay PAN TDS TDS Appeal 4 4 3 3 7 Refund shown to be issued but not received by the assessee Refund 2 Refund claim very old . TDS TDS 16 7 4 5 6 Request for migration of PAN Complaint about Deductor – Not updating TDS properly No credit of TDS given for earlier year leading to non. time barred return Refund 2 10 Deductor deducted tax but not paid to the government Wrong bank a/c no.

Analysis of grievances in CPGRAMS-2/3 No. revised return time expired Others 1 Relief u/s 90/91 delay due to transfer of physical records Delay in issuing TDS exemption certificate TDS refund functionality not allowed Same PAN to different persons Others TDS TDS PAN 1 1 1 1 Challan correction for TDS on immovable property Challan 1 Total 66 . verification of deductors Change in status of PAN Non-issue of form-16 Excess credit available in 26AS not pertaining to assessee Action on TEP Correspondences on old address Adv. ry No processing by CPC shown as in progress Interest on refund not received Non reflection of credit in 26AS. of Griev. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Reasons Catego No.tax payment wrongly entered by bank as TDS payment Others Refund TDS PAN TDS Others Others Others Challan 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 No claim of refund in return.

Analysis of grievances in CPGRAMS-3/3 .

Task 2: Identify grievances prone areas and remedial actions  Identify the most frequent types of grievances and the most frequent causes behind the grievances. the service delivery system and/or the GRM need/s to be modified in order to prevent the root causes from recurring. This step explains how grievances are analyzed in order to make the GRM efficient as well as effective.Grievance Prevention-Systemic Improvement GOI Guidelines (2011) for Implementing Sevottam lay down emphasis on making systemic analysis and changes so that grievances are prevented in future. Localized process improvements are to be identified and implemented quickly in a time-bound manner with clear responsibilities assigned to appropriate functionaries. identify the root cause behind each grievance. Appropriate decisions are required for policy level decisions and these are referred to the competent authority for further action. Task 1: Conduct systemic analysis  Retrieve data on all grievances received during the last month or quarter as appropriate for your Ministry/Department. - . Task 3: Take follow up action to address grievance prone areas  Assign the remedial actions identified to appropriate personnel depending on the nature of action which could range from localized process improvements to apex level policy changes. Also identify remedial measures on how the Citizen's Charter. Using the information on grievance description and subsequent redress provided to the complainant.

. This will enable the ‘Deductor’ to detect its errors and correct them before processing so that TDS credit entries in the accounts of TDS deductees are properly made.TDS related grievances because of error by deductors  Many errors like wrong PAN. no PAN etc take place because there is no immediate feedback mechanism for pointing out the error to deductor right at the time of filling up of TDS return. Provision of online filing on the line of filing of ‘ITR1’ will enable verification of most of the fields leading to minimum errors. This feedback should also provided it with names of all parties wherein PAN have been given by him.  If this online filing is not feasible because of technical constraints. deductor should be provided with a detailed feedback in respect of errors before processing of TDS return.

A special drive can be launched for training small deductors and government deductors. the correction process requires efficient communication with deductor.  Many of the errors committed by Deductors can be avoided if they are properly trained to file TDS returns correctly. Statistics in respect of action taken by deductors can be displayed on the site so that they are motivated to settle the grievances. The same can be provided on the lines of CPGRAMS wherein TDS Deductor can also be given a login id and may be invited for taking action of filing correction return and posting their comments after the same. . The deductors can be explained the process of filing of TDS returns by a mock demo at the CPC TDS site.TDS related grievances because of error by deductors  If there are errors after processing.

AOs may be asked to make all out efforts to trace such orders. The details of such refunds pending because of nonverification by AO can be displayed at the home screen of the AO and AO be asked to take action. On CPC portal. After uploading of such orders and cross-verification with demands in dossiers. At present AOs are not verifying the same. These details need to be verified by the AO. submission of Form 16/ 16A etc. At present. TDS credit not given. the old demands not supported by orders can be identified. But if the same are not traceable. on the certificate given by AO and Range head. All such suspense challans of such payments (Minor head 400) should be reflected at the home screen of AO and and AO be asked to take action. The same is not given by AO.Wrong uploading of demands    Most of the complaints related to processing at CPC are in respect of wrong uploading of demands. A provision may be made in the system to upload all the old orders (orders not passed on AST) in cases of demands exceeding Rs. CsIT may be asked to classify that demand as not enforceable till the time orders are traced and refunds should not be held in such cases. 1 lakh. the taxpayer can file the details of demand paid. AO has to given credit for payments against regular demands. and also submit proof. .

an effort may be made to ascertain the current jurisdiction based on the Taxpayer’s name. Whenever the taxpayer changes address in AIS database or in return by changing the default address. status. the PAN is lying with the AO who is not having jurisdiction over the case because of change in address etc. type of income and employer data in current return and assessee may be asked to confirm the same. many problems of delay in action both on the side of Department (non-service of notice to taxpayer) and taxpayer will be minimised. address. This comes to notice only when a grievance arises or case is picked up in scrutiny.Automatic PAN migration to minimise PAN migration related grievances  Many times. . If the PAN is transferred to correct jurisdiction based on the latest return.

If the ASK system can not be immediately improved to incorporate all the functionalities brought out in the presentation. The same also points out to the attitude of the officer. The same should be directly linked to certain points in APAR. .Other Suggestions   Statistics in the area of grievance redressal is clearly measurable as a performance measure. grievances involving resolution by multiple authorities may be entered in CPGRAMS by authority with which it is pending and which wants to involve other authorities in its resolution.

Thank You Thank you all for patient hearing .