TDS deposit creates fresh limitation period under Section 19 of 1963 Act, appeal dismissed

The Delhi HC dismissed an appeal challenging a Single Judge's ruling on limitation period for a suit. The appellant disputed whether a TDS transaction of Rs. 13,96,886/- dated 30th September, 2015 related to a Deed of Cancellation, claiming it was a separate transaction. The HC rejected this contention as it lacked basis in the appellant's pleadings and was not raised before the Single Judge. The court upheld that TDS deposit creates a fresh limitation period under Section 19 of the 1963 Act, affirming the Single Judge's findings based on the TDS certificate and dismissing the appeal with pending applications.

---

---

Issues:
1. Whether the suit is barred by limitation based on the last payment date and subsequent TDS depositRs.
2. Whether the deposit of TDS by the defendant extends the period of limitation under Section 19 of the Limitation Act, 1963Rs.
3. Whether the TDS deposit pertains to the specific transaction from the Deed of Cancellation or other transactions between the partiesRs.

Analysis:
Issue 1:
The Respondent filed a suit seeking recovery from the Appellant based on a Deed of Cancellation. The Appellant argued that the suit is time-barred as the last payment was made on 27th March 2015, and the suit was filed on 20th September 2018. The Appellant contended that the subsequent TDS deposit on 30th September 2015 does not extend the limitation period.

Issue 2:
The Court analyzed Section 19 of the Limitation Act, 1963, which states that a fresh period of limitation starts from the date of payment on account of debt. The Court considered the TDS deposit as income received by the Respondent, extending the limitation period. It was held that the TDS deposit, being made against the Cancellation Deed, extends the limitation period as per Section 19 of the Act.

Issue 3:
The Appellant disputed the TDS deposit pertained to the specific transaction from the Deed of Cancellation. However, the Court noted that the Appellant did not raise this argument in the initial pleadings. The Court found no basis to accept the contention that the payment pertained to a separate transaction. The Court upheld the Single Judge's decision based on the TDS certificate and the lack of supporting evidence from the Appellant.

Conclusion:
The High Court dismissed the appeal challenging the findings on limitation. The Court rejected the Appellant's plea to leave the issue of limitation open for further adjudication. The dismissal of the appeal did not affect another related appeal filed by the Respondent.

---