TAHSILDAR MEENACHIL Vs. THOMMEN JOSEPH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned Advocate General has canvassed in this appeal the correctness of the view of the learned Judge that R.10 (a) of the Kerala Plantation (Additional) Tax Revision of Assessment R.1965 is ultra vires as going beyond the purview of S.9(1) of the Act and the proviso thereto. We may quote those two provisions:

(2.) S.6 deals with provisional assessment. That is not attracted, and therefore the exclusion of a right of appeal on that ground cannot be sought or found. It is therefore clear that on the terms of the section a right of appeal cannot be excluded in this case.

(3.) Appeal was sought to be excluded by reference to R.10(a) which we have extracted supra. The proviso to that Rule bars a right of appeal under sub-r.(a) of R.5, which reads thus: