Exemption fee deposit deadline held directory where belated payment was made before disposal of the exemption application.

The time fixed for deposit of the exemption fee under the U.P. sales tax exemption scheme was held to be directory, not mandatory, because rule 19 did not make punctual deposit a fundamental condition for exemption and the statutory context did not show that delay by itself defeated the claim. A deposit made while the exemption application was still pending had to be taken into account, so belated payment did not forfeit the dealer's right to exemption. On that basis, rejection of the exemption application and the consequential assessment were treated as unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the time fixed by the Sales Tax Officer for deposit of the exemption fee under the sales tax exemption scheme was mandatory, so that failure to deposit within time forfeited the dealer's right to exemption, or merely directory, so that deposit made before final disposal of the exemption application had to be taken into account.

Analysis: The relevant rule required deposit of the exemption fee demanded by the Sales Tax Officer within the time fixed, but nothing in the language of rule 19 of the U.P. Sales Tax Rules showed that the time element was fundamental to the grant of exemption. The statutory condition in section 4(1)(b) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act required payment of the notified fee, but the nature of the condition had to be determined from the language of the rule and the context. The deposit, though belated, was made while the exemption application was still pending, and there was no basis to treat the time stipulation as a mandatory requirement defeating the exemption claim.

Conclusion: The time limit for depositing the exemption fee was directory, not mandatory, and the belated deposit had to be considered. The rejection of the exemption application and the consequential assessment were not sustainable.

---