Condonation of delay in admitted-tax deposit follows condonation of appeal delay where deposit is a condition precedent.

Under section 9 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, an appeal is valid only when filed with satisfactory proof of payment of the admitted tax, and that deposit requirement is a condition precedent rather than a separate obligation. Section 5 of the Limitation Act applies to appeals under the Act, so the same sufficient cause that supports condonation of delay in filing the appeal also governs delay in depositing the admitted tax. The earlier view that such delay could not be condoned was no longer good law in light of binding Supreme Court authority. The delay in deposit was therefore treated as automatically condoned once the delay in filing the appeal was condoned, in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in depositing the admitted tax before filing the appeal stood automatically condoned when the delay in filing the appeal itself was condoned under section 5 of the Limitation Act.

Analysis: Under section 9 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, an appeal is maintainable only when accompanied by satisfactory proof of payment of the admitted tax. The statutory requirement of deposit is not an independent and separable obligation, but a condition precedent to the appeal becoming a valid appeal. Section 5 of the Limitation Act applies to appeals under the Act, and the same sufficient cause that justifies condonation of delay in filing the appeal also governs the delay in making the admitted-tax deposit. The earlier view that delay in deposit could not be condoned was no longer good law in light of the binding Supreme Court decision relied upon.

Conclusion: The delay in depositing the admitted tax stood automatically condoned once the delay in filing the appeal was condoned, and the answer to the reference was in the affirmative in favour of the assessee.

---