Saurabh Sona

Ambitious, Rigorous, Patriotic

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

IndusInd Bank, Case ID 71675881 / 72110022.

You claim card 8006 was upgraded to 6066 and cancelled on 22.09.2021 with no dues. Intimation and CIC closure were your duty, not the customer’s. You failed both.

Experian as on 20.08.2026 still reports card 8006 ACTIVE, outstanding ₹34,119 against limit ₹37,384 — 91% utilisation on this line alone. That false live balance is driving overall utilisation near 93% and suppressing the credit score. Your 07.04.2025 “No Due” mail is contradicted by your own 20.08.2026 furnishing.

I will not send any CIBIL PDF. You are the credit institution.

Demand :

Report 8006 and 6066 CLOSED, outstanding NIL, to CIBIL, Experian, Equifax and CRIF.

Disclose the date, if any, on which IndusInd reported 8006 as closed.

Compensation: ₹100 per day from 21.04.2025 for delayed correction of credit information; ₹500 per calendar day from 01.04.2025 under RBI Directions 2025 Para 19; and ₹50,000 for deficiency, harassment and loss of creditworthiness caused by the false 91% utilisation / suppressed score.

No written closure and CIC update: i will move to RBI CMS under RB-IOS 2026. @MyIndusIndBank @RBI

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

@MyIndusIndBank Dear so called Bank , I ended relationship with you 5-6 years ago why this shit showing in my credit beauro and that's still open . Even I mail you several time to remove it .

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

IndusInd Bank, Case ID 71675881 / 72110022. On 21.03.2025 I sought closure of card ending 8006, still reported ACTIVE by Experian despite non-use for years. Your 29.03.2025 reply addressed card 6066. Your 07.04.2025 mail then claimed 8006 was “upgraded” to 6066 and cancelled on 22.09.2021, with no dues and no prior notice on record. RBI Directions, 2025, Para 19 require closure within 7 working days, immediate SMS/email intimation, and suitable CIC reporting. Para 20 requires unused cards to be closed and updated with CICs within 30 days. Update 8006 and 6066 as CLOSED with all CICs and confirm in writing that no live card remains in my name, failing which the matter goes to RBI CMS under RB-IOS 2026 with claim for statutory compensation. @MyIndusIndBank @RBI

You are the credit institution. You furnish data to the CICs. I will not send my CIBIL PDF.
State, with date and reporting reference, when card ending 8006 and card ending 6066 were reported by IndusInd as CLOSED to CIBIL, Experian, Equifax and CRIF. Attach your CIC submission / member-control evidence, not a request for my report.
If the accounts were closed on 22.09.2021 as your 07.04.2025 mail claims, produce the bureau reporting date.

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

@MyIndusIndBank Tape recorder ON ho gaya hai bas ek hi song bajega😀

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

@MyIndusIndBank I will not now I think I should move legally as per RBI I am eligible to ask you for compensation of 100/calander day

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

@MyIndusIndBank Are you crazy I have show you all details and you are asking me to show you my cibil which any bank can see .

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

@MyIndusIndBank I think you should read my post already mail you several times and in the screenshot you can see the account number so kindly check and close.Registered email id [email protected]

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

we alrady submitted through your link and you forwarded my mail to taxbuddy they again ask me the details i submitted that too , you closed the case and now taxbuddy didnt replied . My question is if i paid you then you are liable not taxbuddy . i will ask my refund to you not taxbuddy .

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

@JioFinance1 alag hi level ka scam hai bhai yaha to , koi helpline number nahi , advance payment , once pay ai will stop reply if you call taxbuddy partner web they have ai helpdesk and your payment through upi so no chargeback . bhai paise de de tere se na ho payga

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

@fssaiindia @amul_india Dear amul , its almost 5 days i had submitted all the proof and picture through DM still not heard a single word from your end .

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

@fssaiindia @amul_india Dear amul , i purchased this amul cheese from flipkart minute and i am 100% confirm this is counterfake product but how i can confirm do you have any store or address where i can send so that you can check and confirm me .

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

@NHAI_Official @NHAI_Official are we waiting for some tragedy or someone lost his life . This entire belt is facing heavy rain and due to this the black and white paint in cement block became black and at night there is not a single street light . The block also not straight its zig zag .

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

@NHAI_Official Dear NHAI in ranchi from ITKI road bus stand to ratu road flyover the road is divided into two parts by cement blocks and there is no street light there . At night the cement blocks which are black and it's not straight invite accident . Requested you to kindly fix redium strip over these block atleast so anyone can see that divider .if you want I can attach images .

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

@IRCTCofficial ticket ID. 884706109376260566 already submitted my details still asking the same question again and again , your helpline is not working . Kindly resolve the issue

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

@IRCTCofficial @RailMinIndia @AshwiniVaishnaw @RailwaySeva

What kind of service is this?

I have raised several complaints and made repeated calls just to UPDATE an old mobile number on the IRCTC portal. That number is linked with my Aadhaar. You will neither change the number nor delete the User ID. Because of this I cannot book Tatkal.

Now the complaint is CLOSED with the remark “sent to higher authority.” I cannot even track whether the file is open or dumped.

Closing a ticket is not resolving it. Update the number.

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

blame - blame game is now on🤣😂🤔. mera paisa de de bhai fiř aap dekho - aap dekho khelte rahna .

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

Resident. Flat bought before 23 Jul 2024, sold after.
Utility computes indexed LTCG of Rs 7.20L and 20% tax. It also sets off my Rs 3.47L business loss u/s 71(2) — but only against the unindexed Rs 16.65L.
Second proviso to s.112(1)(a) says: pay the lower of 12.5% (new law) and tax “as the Act stood before” FA (No. 2) 2024.
Before that amendment, 71(2) would have hit the Rs 7.20L.
Where in the Act does it say that set-off is kept out of the old-law 20% computation?
CPC’s answer: “Verify CYLA & SI.”
That’s a screen. Not a section.

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

@IncomeTaxIndia @FinMinIndia @CBDT

I have raised this issue 5 times with the Income Tax Department regarding the Section 112(1)(a) grandfathering provision for AY 2026-27. Not once have I received a substantive answer to the actual legal question.

Known grievance references: 26579964, 26590005, 26580035.

My facts are straightforward:

• Resident individual
• Property acquired 22 March 2018
• Sold 20 March 2026
• Normal LTCG: ₹16,65,302
• Indexed LTCG under the Section 112 grandfathering calculation: ₹7,20,017
• Current-year business loss: ₹3,46,692
The ITD utility itself calculates the ₹7.20L indexed figure and 20% tax.
Section 71(2) allows current-year business loss to be set off against Capital Gains. The utility is already giving that set-off through CYLA in the normal computation.
My precise question is NOT whether the business loss can be set off.
My question is:
Where does the law say that a valid Section 71(2) set-off, already recognised against my LTCG, must be ignored when calculating the 20% indexed tax under the second proviso to Section 112(1)(a)?

I specifically requested the exact Section / Rule / CBDT notification / validation rule supporting this treatment.

CPC's response was only:

“Please verify Schedule CYLA & SI…”

That does not answer the statutory question.

ITD's own guidance states that eligible resident individuals/HUFs can choose 20% with indexation where it results in lower tax liability.

If the indexed branch is only a “computation”, please explain why a legally permissible Section 71(2) adjustment is excluded from that computation.

Please provide the statutory basis. Not a generic utility instruction.

#IncomeTax #ITR3 #Section112 #CBDT #Tax

[Saurabh Sona @sona_saurabh]

@IncomeTaxIndia @FinMinIndia @CBDT

Still awaiting a substantive answer.

My question is very specific:

Where does Section 112(1)(a), its second proviso, Section 71(2), any Rule, CBDT notification, or AY 2026-27 ITR validation rule state that a valid current-year business loss set-off against LTCG under Section 71(2) must be excluded while computing the tax under the pre-23 July 2024 indexed-cost comparison?

The law says: “such excess shall be ignored.”

It does not expressly say that a Section 71(2) set-off must be ignored for this comparison.

If the Department's position is that it must be excluded, please provide the exact statutory provision/instruction requiring that treatment.

A response saying “verify Schedule CYLA & SI” does not answer this question.

Please answer the legal question with the exact provision.

#IncomeTax #ITR3 #Section112 #Section71