Pre-deposit as condition precedent barred estate duty appeal without prior payment under the statutory proviso.

The Calcutta HC held that an appeal under section 62(1) of the Estate Duty Act was barred unless the demanded duty had been paid before filing, because the proviso to sub-clause (iv) imposed an independent condition precedent. That requirement was not dependent on section 46 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and was not displaced by the repeal of that Act or by the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appeal was therefore not maintainable without prior payment, and the reference was answered in favour of the Revenue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the accountable person's appeal before the Appellate Controller was maintainable without prior payment of the duty demanded under the Estate Duty Act, 1953.

Analysis: The statutory scheme of section 62(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, permits an appeal against specified orders, but the proviso to sub-clause (iv) expressly bars such an appeal unless the duty has been paid before filing. The Court held that this proviso is an independent requirement and is not dependent on section 46 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, even though section 73(5) of the Estate Duty Act applies the recovery provisions of that Act for penalty purposes. The repeal of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and the enactment of the Income-tax Act, 1961, did not take away or impliedly repeal the pre-deposit condition contained in section 62.

Conclusion: The appeal before the Appellate Controller was not maintainable in the absence of prior payment of the duty, and the answer to the reference was in favour of the Revenue.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a taxing statute expressly makes payment of the demanded duty a condition precedent to appeal, that requirement operates independently and is not displaced by repeal or re-enactment of the referenced recovery provisions unless the legislature clearly so provides.

---