1 IN HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2020 BEFORE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S. DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.20086 OF 2019 (T-IT) BETWEEN ANJANAPPA HANUMANAIK, NO.2357. 1ST C MAIN ROAD, R.P.O LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGARA, 2 ND STAGE BENGALURU-560040. PETITIONER (BY SRI. ARAVINDA S.N, ADVOCATE) AND 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEAL III, BMTC DEPOT BUILDING, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560095. 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3 (3)(1), HMT BHAVAN, BELLARI ROAD, BANGALORE-560032. RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH ORDER OF TRIBUNAL IN INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING B GROUP, THIS DAY, COURT MADE FOLLOWING: 2 ORDER short grievance of petitioner-assessee is against orders dated 29.6.2018 and 22.03.2019 made by answering respondents at Annexures F & H respectively whereby amounts deducted by way of TDS by his employer have not been given credit and appeal filed against same having been rejected on ground of limitation. 2. Sri. K. V. Aravind, learned Senior Panel Counsel on request having accepted notice for respondents, opposes writ petition contending that there is statutory bar for seeking any modification or rectification after expiry of statutory period, even if facts pleaded are true and therefore, impugned orders cannot be faltered. 3. Having heard learned counsel for parties and having perused Petition Papers, this Court grants reprieve to petitioner-assessee because: (a) there is prima facie material to hold that TDS amount has been credited to Exchequer by employer; however, credit was not given to assessee and his application for redressal of said grievance has been 3 negatived on ground of bar of limitation; true it is that law relating to limitation is statute of repose; however, legitimate relief which petitioners are otherwise entitled to at hands of Writ Court cannot be denied on technical ground of delay & latches; it does not behove State or its instrumentalities to defeat legitimate claim of poor citizen on such technical grounds as held by Apex Court in case of NIRANJANLAL AGARWALA VS. UNION OF INDIA, AIR 1969 SC 23; and, (b) in fact, material placed on record goes to show that even after arguable expiry of limitation period prescribed under section 154(7), credit of small sum of Rs.3,000/- has been made available to petitioner-assessee as is reflected vide column No.23 in Annexure E; if that is position, this court does not find any reason or logic in not extending same benefit in respect of other amounts of TDS; however, this is matter to be decided by 2nd respondent herein, after ascertaining factuals from records. 4 In above circumstances, this Writ Petition succeeds in part; impugned orders are set at naught; delay in making subject application stands condoned; matter is remanded to 2nd respondent for consideration afresh on merits, within period of three months, in accordance with law. All contentions of parties are kept open. No costs. Sd/- JUDGE CBC Anjanappa Hanumanaik v. CIT Appeal-III, Bangalore / ITO, Ward-3(3)(1), Bangalore