Short Note : The material facts giving rise to this revision petition briefly are as follows: The opponent is the proprietor of M/s. Narendra Iron and Steel Works, situated at 38 Shilnath Camp, Indore. On a notice being served on the opponent regarding valuation of his property for determination of property tax, as required by section 146 of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), objections were raised to the assessment by the respondent. These objections were over ruled. The respondent, therefore, preferred an appeal under section 149 of the Act in the Court of District Judge, Indore. The learned second Additional District Judge by his judgment in Misc. Appeal No. 33 of 1966 set aside the assessment and remanded the case back with a direction to reassess the property in accordance with provision of section 138(c) of the Act. Aggrieved by that order, the appellant-Corporation preferred a revision petition before this Court. By its order dated 18-10-1967 passed in Civil Revision No. 109 of 1967, this Court modified the order of remand passed by the Additional District Judge and directed the Commissioner to make the assessment afresh in the light of the observations made by this Court. Thereafter, the Commissioner commenced proceedings for reassessment. A notice was served on the opponent as required by section 146(1) of the Act intimating that the property was re-assessed as stated in the notice. No objections were filed by in the opponent within thirty-one days as stated in the notice but a request was made for grant of a month's time for filing objections. This request was rejected. The objections were then filed on 23-4-1969 and these were rejected by the Commissioner on the ground that the objections were not filed within time. Aggrieved by that order, the opponent preferred an appeal before the Additional District Judge, Indore. The learned Additional District Judge found that though the Municipal Commissioner was not wrong in holding that the objections were barred by limitation yet as the re-assessment was not made by the Commissioner in accordance with the directions of this Court, the matter deserved to be remanded. In this view of the matter the learned Additional District Judge set aside the assessment and remanded the case back to the Commissioner to re-assess the property. Aggrieved by that order, the applicant has preferred this revision petition. In this view of the matter the learned Additional District Judge set aside the assessment and remanded the case back to the Commissioner to re-assess the property. Aggrieved by that order, the applicant has preferred this revision petition. Held : Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I have come to the conclusion that this revision petition deserves to be allowed. Under section 149 of the Act, the lower appellate Court has jurisdiction to hear an appeal against a decision of the Municipal Commissioner only if an objection has been preferred under section 148 of the Act. Now, the lower appellate Court rightly came to the conclusion that objections were not preferred under section 147 of the Act. In view of this finding, the lower appellate Court had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal which deserved to be dismissed on that ground alone. The question as to whether the re-assessment of the property made by the Commissioner was or was not in accordance with the observation made by this Court could not be gone into unless the appeal was held to be competent. Learned counsel for the opponent contended that it was not necessary for the opponent to file objections again when he had already filed the objections to the earlier assessment. But the case was remanded to Commissioner for re-assessment. Thereafter a notice was again served, after re-assessment, to the opponent, in accordance with section 146 of the Act. The objection filed earlier i.e. before the re-assessment could not be considered to be objection filed under section 147 of the Act to the re-assessment made. As the lower appellate Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal the impugned order deserves to be set aside under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Revision allowed.