Limitation and tax deposit rules: section 5 does not extend to section 30 applications, while cheque payment remains valid despite bank commission deduction.

Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to an application under section 30 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 seeking to set aside an ex parte assessment, because the Sales Tax Officer is an executive authority and the statute contains no express condonation provision for that remedy. The text also states that payment of admitted tax by cheque is not invalid merely because bank commission reduced the amount credited to the Government account, where the relevant rules treat the net credited sum as the deposited amount and the department accepted the cheque without objection. The stated legal effect is that delay under section 30 could not be condoned under section 5, while the cheque-based deposit remained valid.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applied to an application under section 30 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 seeking to set aside an ex parte assessment order. (ii) Whether payment of the admitted tax by cheque, where the bank deducted commission and credited a lesser amount to the Government account, amounted to a valid deposit for the purpose of section 30.

Issue (i): Whether section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applied to an application under section 30 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 seeking to set aside an ex parte assessment order.

Analysis: Section 5 of the Limitation Act applies only when an appeal or application is made before a court and sufficient cause is shown for delay. The Sales Tax Officer is an executive authority and not a court. The U.P. Sales Tax Act separately incorporates condonation of delay in some provisions, such as appeals and revisions, but section 30 contains no such enabling provision. The statutory scheme therefore does not permit application of section 5 to an application under section 30.

Conclusion: Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 did not apply, and the delayed application under section 30 could not be entertained.

Issue (ii): Whether payment of the admitted tax by cheque, where the bank deducted commission and credited a lesser amount to the Government account, amounted to a valid deposit for the purpose of section 30.

Analysis: The relevant rules permitted payment by cheque and provided that, where bank commission was deducted, the net amount credited after deduction would be treated as the amount deposited. The cheque tendered by the dealer was accepted by the department without objection, and the short credit resulted from bank commission. In these circumstances, the department could not deny compliance without first requiring the deficiency to be made good.

Conclusion: The deposit was not invalid merely because bank commission was deducted from the cheque amount.

Final Conclusion: The revision petitions failed because the applications under section 30 were barred by time, and the ex parte assessments were left undisturbed. The challenge to the cheque-based deposit did not alter that result.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to delay in moving an application before an executive sales tax authority under section 30 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 unless the statute expressly so provides.

---