Remove condition to disable transaction confirm button if user has no balance

[jpuri]

Description

Currently we have these 2 conditions checked to disable submit button on confirmation pages:

1. account balance is less that gas + transaction value or
2. account balance is 0

The second condition disables a 0 value transaction on a gasless network - something we support in MetaMask extension.

The PR removes the second condition and the first one alone is sufficient.

Manual testing steps

1. Follow the steps listed here https://consensys.net/docs/goquorum/en/latest/tutorials/quorum-dev-quickstart/ to run Quorum locally
2. Run a DAPP locally and send transaction with value and gasPrice to 0
3. Notice the "Submit" button is enabled

Related issues

_Fixes #6567

Pre-merge author checklist

• I’ve followed MetaMask Coding Standards.
• I've clearly explained:
  • What problem this PR is solving.
  • How this problem was solved.
  • How reviewers can test my changes.
• I’ve indicated what issue this PR is linked to: Fixes #???
• I’ve included tests if applicable.
• I’ve documented any added code.
• I’ve applied the right labels on the PR (see labeling guidelines).
• I’ve properly set the pull request status:
  • In case it's not yet "ready for review", I've set it to "draft".
  • In case it's "ready for review", I've changed it from "draft" to "non-draft".

Pre-merge reviewer checklist

• I've manually tested the PR (e.g. pull and build branch, run the app, test code being changed).
• I confirm that this PR addresses all acceptance criteria described in the ticket it closes and includes the necessary testing evidence such as recordings and or screenshots.

[github-actions]

CLA Signature Action: All authors have signed the CLA. You may need to manually re-run the blocking PR check if it doesn't pass in a few minutes.

[digiwand]

Lgtm! can merge after ci / scripts (audit:ci) test works again. more details can be found here

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (9a37d5a) 34.61% compared to head (a91cd4f) 34.61%.
Report is 11 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #7335      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   34.61%   34.61%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1019     1019              
  Lines       27192    27191       -1     
  Branches     2217     2218       +1     
==========================================
- Hits         9412     9411       -1     
  Misses      17289    17289              
  Partials      491      491              

Files	Coverage Δ
app/components/UI/TransactionReview/index.js	50.00% <ø> (-1.00%)	⬇️

... and 5 files with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

The base branch was changed.

[jpuri]

Bitrise: https://app.bitrise.io/app/be69d4368ee7e86d/pipelines/29631341-e3ce-4196-9ec5-fff489888d54

[digiwand]

just curious what was the thought around removing senderBalanceIsZero entirely? Should we preserve this for networks we know that use gas?

[sonarcloud]

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

100.0% Coverage
0.0% Duplication