If he revenue has paid the excess interest based on the intimation , the revenue will be justified in  demanding the excess interests paid by them,  however the Act is silent on the issue . The assessee has no remedy than filing the writ before High Court , however it is not desirable .

The assessee should down load the form  .  In case any difficulty the assessee may contact the Designated Authority .

The assesee can file  an application for rectification of mistake . It is the duty of the Assessing Officer to rectify the mistake and grant the relief as per the law . Article. 265 of the Constitution of India states  that “No tax shall be levied or collected except by authority of law“. The collection of tax has to be also within the frame work of law. The Circular No. 14 (XL-35), dt. 11/04/1955, also states that a duty is cast upon the Assessing Officer  to assist and aid the assessee in the matter of taxation. Assessing Officers  are supposed to advise the assessee and guide them and not  take advantage of any error or mistake committed by the assessee or of their ignorance. The function of the Assessing officer  is to administer the statute with solicitude for public exchequer with an inbuilt idea of fairness to taxpayers.   In CIT v. Shelly Products (2003) 261 ITR 367 (SC)  (382 ) the court held that , “If the assessee has by mistake or inadvertence or on account of ignorance, included in his income any amount which is exempted from payment of Income-tax or is not income within the contemplation of law, he may like wise bring this to the notice of the assessing authority, which if satisfied, may grant him relief and refund the tax paid in excess  if any“.

In CIT v. K.N.Oil Industaries ( 1983 ) 142 ITR 13 (MP) (HC) ,the court held that if it was apparent from the record that the assessee was entitle to a particular relief , the relief should be granted , though the relief was not claimed in the original assessment proceeidngs .

We have been informed by many Tax professionals  that they are not getting the response from  New portal  as regards  DTVSV. Please write to Designated  Authority .You may also email  in detail  the problem relating to New Portal to Shri S.R Wadhwa , Chairman Representation Committee of the All India Federation of  Tax Practioners (AIFTP ) who is  interacting with the concerned officials from CBDT  on day to day basis to solve the all issues relating to functioning of New Portal . His email is as under  wadhwasr@hotmail.com  . You may also  forward copy to aiftpho@mail.com .  Any tax professionals  who have issues in functioning  of new  New portal may  email to Shri S.R .Wadhwa ,   Chairman Representation Committee of the AIFTP . 

There is no separate Challan  has been prescribed .  Most of the assesses  have paid taxes   by using  regular assessment tax challan , with minor head 400 . Write properly the PAN  NO and Assessment year .   If  PAN NO is  written   correctly  the  Designated Authority will  grant credit for the amount paid . The assessee may write to the Designated Authority for any further clarification .

The assessee may file rectification application before the Designated Authority .  In case no rectification is done with in a reasonable time the assessee may have to file writ before the High Court .

In CIT v. Vasantben H. Sheth [2015] 372 ITR 536 (Guj.)(HC), it was held that second application on same grounds was not maintainable, and hence, the Tribunal was not justified in considering second application and rectifying its order. {Also see: S. Panneerselvam (Dr.) v. ACIT (2010) 217 Taxation 260 / Tax. L.R. 326 (Vol. 40 May 2010) (Mad.)(HC), CIT v. Aiswarya Trading Co. [2010] 192 Taxman 385 (Ker.)(HC), CIT v. Panchu Arunachalam [2010] 323 ITR 31 (Mad.)(HC) and Hexa Securities & Finance Co. Ltd. v. ITO [2010] 127 TTJ 510 (Delhi)(Trib.), CIT v. Chemical & Allied Products [2008] 296 ITR 297 (All.)}. In Kailashnath Malhotra v. JCIT [2011] 8 ITR (T) 457 (TM)(Mum.), it was held that the Tribunal having taken a conscious decision in the order passed on the first Miscellaneous Application that its conclusion in the original order was not based on erroneous facts or non-appreciation of facts on record that no legal contention going to the root of the matter remained to be considered, second Miscellaneous Application was not maintainable on the same set of facts.

VSTA Form cannot be up loded presently on the new system portal as it does not have a tab for the same , please visit NSDL portal . It may desirable to contact Deisgnated Authority and also write tto the Chairman CBDT . In case no reply is received it may be desirable to file  writ petition before High Court .

There is no time limit now , however it is desirable to file the Form No 4 at the earliest . 

Please contact the Designated Authority  or write to the Chairman CBDT