ARSHAD MATLOOB ,GOPALGANJ vs. DC/AC CIRCLE 1, MUZAFFARPUR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA BENCH, PATNA VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member and Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member I.T.A. Nos.106 to 110 & 111/Pat/2026 Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2013-14 & 2015-16 Arshad Matloob………………..………………………………...Appellant LIC OF INDIA, Shahi Complex, Gopalganj H.O., Gopalganj Bihar-841428 [PAN No. AJHPM2796H] vs. DC/AC, Circle-1, Muzaffarpur..……....……………………..….Respondent Appearances by: Smt. Archana Sharma, CA, appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Shri Manab Adak, JCIT, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : April 21, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : April 22, 2026 ORDER Per Bench: These appeals are filed by the same assessee against the separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) [hereinafter referred to as “the ld. CIT(A)”)] all dated 19.12.2025 pertaining to the assessment years 2009-10 to 2013-14 & 2015-16, u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”]. The details of the appeals are as under: - ITA No. 106/Pat/2026 for the assessment year 2009-10, arising out of the assessment order dated 26.10.2010; ITA No. 107/Pat/2026 for the assessment year 2010-11, arising out of the assessment order dated 17.06.2011; ITA No. 108/Pat/2026 for the assessment year 2011- 12, arising out of the assessment order dated 26.02.2013; ITA No. 109/Pat/2026 for the assessment year 2012-13, arising out of the

ITA No(s).106 to 110 & 111/Pat/2026 Arshad Matloob; AYs: 2009-10 to 2013-14 & 2015-16 assessment order dated 05.07.2013; ITA No. 110/Pat/2026 for the assessment year 2013-14, arising out of the assessment order dated 24.07.2017 and ITA No. 111/Pat/2026 for the assessment year 2015-16, arising out of the assessment order dated 18.12.2015.

Since all the appeals pertain to the same assessee and involve identical issues, therefore, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. However, for the sake of convenience, the facts are being taken from ITA No. 106/Pat/2026 for the assessment year 2009–10, and the findings recorded therein shall apply mutatis mutandis to the remaining appeals. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, assessee filed its return of income and TDS deducted by the employer was not granted while sustaining the return u/s 143(1) of the Act, resulting erroneous demand being raised. 3. Aggrieved by the above demand, assessee was not aware of such demand due to non-monitoring of the Income Tax portal. Upon coming to know outstanding demand, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a substantial delay of 5387 days. However, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeals on the ground of delay observing that the delay was inordinate and assessee has failed to properly substantiate the reasons for such delay and no sufficient cause was shown for condoning condonation of such delay. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee was dismissed without adjudicating the issues on merit. 4. Still aggrieved by the above order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the delay before the Ld. CIT(A) occurred due to lack of awareness and non-reflection of TDS in Form 26AS and assessee is now

ITA No(s).106 to 110 & 111/Pat/2026 Arshad Matloob; AYs: 2009-10 to 2013-14 & 2015-16 in a position to furnish necessary documents as the issue relating to grant of legitimate TDS credit and, therefore, deserves to be examined on merit. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the decision of the authorities below. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record, it is an undisputed fact that the appeals were filed before the Ld. CIT(A) with adequate supporting evidence. At the same time, it is also noted that issues involve related to the grant of TDS credit which is legitimately cannot be denied merely on technical ground. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of delay without examine the merit of the case. In our considered view while the delay is indeed significant and attributable to the negligence of the assessee. The issue involve goes to the route of the correct tax liability, therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the view that matter requires fresh examination. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The Assessing Officer is directed to verify the claim of TDS with reference to records including Form 26AS and other supporting evidence and grant due credit in accordance with law. Further, doing so, adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee should be given. The assessee is also directed to produce all necessary documents including TDS certificate and supporting records and properly comply with the notices issued by the Assessing Officer and assessee do not seek unnecessary adjournment. In terms of the above, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Since, the issues involved in ITA Nos.107 to 110 & 111/Pat/2026, for the assessment year 2010-11 to 2013-14 & 2015-16 are identical to 3

ITA No(s).106 to 110 & 111/Pat/2026 Arshad Matloob; AYs: 2009-10 to 2013-14 & 2015-16 that in the ITA No.106/Pat/2026 for the assessment year 2009-10, our findings and directions in the said appeal shall apply mutatis mutandis to these appeals as well. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 22nd April, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Laxmi Prasad Sahu] [Sonjoy Sarma] Accountant Member Judicial Member

Dated: 22.04.2026. DP, PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR)

//True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches