1. No one appeared in this appeal on the last two dates and today also the Ld. Counsel for the parties have chosen to remain absent. 2. I have perused and thoughtfully considered the material on record. 3. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 22-03-2005, passed by the Ld. Dy. Commissioner, Sales Tax (Appeals) (Appellate Authority), Jammu, in Appeal No. 398/DCJ/AP/ST/2003-2004. The Appellate Authority has dismissed the appeal of the appellant summarily on the ground that the appellant has not filed proof of payment of 20% of the assessed tax and 50% of the penalty imposed in the order impugned. This is required under clauses (b) & (c) of the 2nd Proviso to Section 11 of the Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tax Act, 1962. He was afforded an opportunity under Notice No: 398/DCJ/AP/ST/2003-2004/809 dated 29-06-2004, to explain the reasons for failure. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant, Sh. Gulshan Gupta, appeared on 03-08-2004, 27-08-2004, 24-09-2004, 05-10-2004 and 18-11-2004, 24-12-2004, 09-02-2005 and01-03-2005 every time seeking further time to do the needful. Ultimately, last opportunity was afforded fixing the case for 15-03-2005, when no body appeared nor was the needful done. 4. What requires consideration is to see whether the order of the Appellate Authority can be maintained on the reasoning projected therein, i.e. whether the appellant was obliged to file proof of the payment of 20% of the assessed tax and 50% of the penalty imposed on him by the Assessing Authority, as per the requirement of clauses (b) and (c) of the 2nd proviso to Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tax Act, 1962. In order to have a proper understanding of the matter it will be appropriate to reproduce the relevant excerpts of Section 11 of the Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tax Act, 1962, herein below:- "Section 11:-..Provided further that no appeal shall be entertained by the said authority unless it is satisfied that:- (a) where all the returns for a year have been filed, the amount of tax due under this Act on the turnover of sales or purchases, as the case may be, admitted by the appellant in the returns filed by him or at any stage in any proceedings under this Act, whichever is higher, has been paid; or (b) Where some of the returns for a year have not been filed or no return has been filed for such year, the amount of tax due under this Act, admitted by the appellant in the returns, if any, filed by him or at any stage in any proceedings under this Act or 20% of the amount of tax assessed, whichever is higher, has been paid; or (c) in case the appeal is against the imposition of penalty, 50% of the penalty levied has been paid; [Provided that the Appellate Authority may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, stay the recovery of the disputed amount of tax and penalty. However, the stay will not cover the amount of tax and penalty payable under clauses (a), (b) and of the 2nd Proviso] Explanation:- Nothing in this sub-section shall apply to the cases where the Commissioner in exercise of the powers vested under Section 8 makes an order extending the date of payment. 5. From the perusal of the Section 11 Supra, what comes to the fore is that the deposit of 20% of the amount of tax assessed and 50% of the penalty where the appeal is against the order of imposition of penalty, is a statutory requirement. The terms of Section 11 clauses (b) and (c) are mandatory in nature as the word used is "shall". Section 11 (b) and (c) give the Appellate Authority the teeth to proceed in a matter. The terms of Section 11 clauses (b) and (c) are mandatory in nature as the word used is "shall". Section 11 (b) and (c) give the Appellate Authority the teeth to proceed in a matter. Filing of the proof of payment of 20% of the amount of tax assessed and 50% of the penalty levied is a condition precedent for lodging an appeal before the Appellate Authority which, as per the explanation added to Section 11, can be relaxed only where the extension of the date of payment, is granted, by an order, made by the Commissioner, in exercise of the powers vested in him under section 8 of the Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tax Act, 1962. This has not been done in this case. This condition cannot be waived by any other means or any other Authority. It has a binding force the intention being to ensure that the appellant is prosecuting the appeal with due diligence, in good faith and with an honest intention and not for the heck of it. There thus seems to be no reason to take a view contrary to the one expressed by the Appellate Authority in her order. 6. The appeal of the appellant is recklessly time barred. What is enumerated here on this issue is that the appellant has filed the appeal before this Tribunal on 25-04-2008 against the order of the Appellate Authority dated 22-03-2005. The appeal is buttressed with an application for the condonation of delay. In this application appellant has blown hot and cold in stating that the copy of the order of the Assessing Authority may have been served upon him on 02-04-2005, but the same was received by his counsel. The certificate of service placed on the record of the file bears testimony to the fact that the copy of the order impugned in this appeal has been provided to the appellant on 02-04-2005.. This works out to be a period of more than 3 years from the date of the service of the order. The certificate of service placed on the record of the file bears testimony to the fact that the copy of the order impugned in this appeal has been provided to the appellant on 02-04-2005.. This works out to be a period of more than 3 years from the date of the service of the order. The appeal, as such, has been filed after the statutory period as provided in Section 11-A sub section (1), of the Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tax Act, 1962 which, for the convenience of ready reference, is reproduced herein below verbatim:- Section 11-A(1):- Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, any person aggrieved by an order passed under section 72 may within three months from the date of such order prefer an appeal to the Tribunal. 7. The Section makes it abundantly clear that an appeal should be filed within a period of three months. The appellant has not done so, nor has he filed any application for the condonation of this delay. Section 12-B Jammu and Kashmir General Sales Tax Act which assumes significance here reads as under:- Section 12-B:- the provisions of Sections 5 and 12 of the Limitation Act, Samvat 1995, shall apply to the appeals and revisions filed under this Act before the Appellate, Reviewing Authorities or the Tribunal. 8. Section 5 of the Limitation Act provides as under:- Extension of prescribed period in certain cases:- Any appeal or any application, other than an application under any of the provisions of Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, may be admitted after the prescribed period if the appellant or the applicant satisfies the Court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal or making the application within such period" 9. On the plain reading of Section 5 supra it becomes clear that if an appeal is filed after the period provided for such filing, the appellant must prove the existence of a sufficient cause, to the satisfaction of the Court, a condition precedent, for the court to exercise its discretion in the matter of condoning the delay. This discretion is a judicial discretion and not an arbitrary one. Where sufficient cause is not shown, to the satisfaction of the Court, no question of condonation of delay arises. This discretion is a judicial discretion and not an arbitrary one. Where sufficient cause is not shown, to the satisfaction of the Court, no question of condonation of delay arises. Nothing further has to be done in such an eventuality and the appeal has to be dismissed on that ground alone, irrespective of whether limitation is, or, is not, set up as a ground of attack or defence. The Court can suo motto look into that aspect also. The law of limitation has to be applied with all its rigour when the statute so prescribe and the Courts have no power to extend the period of limitation on equitable grounds as has been held in P.K. Rama V/s State of Kerala and Anr reported in AIR 1998 S.C.2276 10. Viewed thus for all that has been said above the order of the Appellate Authority is confirmed and the appeal of the appellant is dismissed, File shall be consigned to records after due completion. Records summoned be returned forthwith.