JUDGMENT Gopalan Nambiyar, C. J. 1. The learned Advocate General has canvassed in this appeal thecorrectness of the view of the learned Judge that R.10 (a) of the KeralaPlantation (Additional) Tax Revision of Assessment R.1965 is ultra vires asgoing beyond the purview of S.9(1) of the Act and the proviso thereto. We mayquote those two provisions: "S.9(1): Any assessee objecting to the extent of plantation or the amount ofplantation tax assessed under S.5 or S.6A or denying his liability to beassessed under this Act or objection to any order of the assessing authorityunder this Act may appeal to the appellate authority against the assessment oragainst such order: Provided that no appeal shall lie in respect of an assessment made under sub-s.(4) of S.5 or under S.6." "R.10(a): An appeal against the decision or orders of an assessing authorityshall lie to the appellate authority appointed by the Government by notificationissued under sub-s.(2) of S.2 of the Act: Provided however that no appeal shall lie against an assessment order passed under sub-r.5(a)." In accordance with the well settled principle that a right of appeal to a party isan important substantive right and that no limitations on the exercise of thesaid right are to be looked into or recognised other than what are providedeither expressly or by necessary implication, we shall proceed to scrutinise theprovisions of S.9. That Section clearly confers a right of appeal to an assesseeobjecting to the extent of plantation or the amount of tax assessed under S.6or S.6A; secondly, to one denying his liability to pay tax under the Act; andthirdly to one objecting to any order of the assessing authority under the Act.The right of appeal is thus conferred in very wide amplitude. The onlyrestriction placed on the exercise of that right by the proviso is that no appeallies in respect of an assessment made under sub-s.(4) of S.5 or S.6. We mayturn to these sections to see if they are attracted or not. The onlyrestriction placed on the exercise of that right by the proviso is that no appeallies in respect of an assessment made under sub-s.(4) of S.5 or S.6. We mayturn to these sections to see if they are attracted or not. S.5(4) reads: "5(4) If any person fails to make a return under sub-s.(3) of S.4, or fails tocomply with all the terms of a notice issued under sub-s.(5) of that section orunder sub-s.(2) of this Section, the assessing authority shall determine theextent of plantation to the best of his judgment and assess the plantation taxpayable by the Assessee on the basis of extent of the plantation sodetermined." xxxx xxxx xxxx (S.6 is not quoted as it deals with provisional assessment) We then proceed to examine whether the assessment was for any of thecauses mentioned in these provisions. There was no failure to make a returnunder sub-s.(3) of S.4, to attract S.5. That sub-section contemplates theservice of notice on a person who holds an extent of plantation sufficient torender him liable to plantation tax, requiring him to furnish a return. Sub-s.(6)of S.4 deals with a notice to produce documents and failure to produce thesame. Lastly sub-s.(2) of S.5 refers to a notice to attend the office in person orcause to produce evidence in support of the return. It is plain that none ofthese contingencies mentioned in sub-s.(4) of S.5 have application to the caseon hand. So that a right of appeal cannot be excluded by the application ofsub-s.(4) of S.5. 2. S.6 deals with provisional assessment. That is not attracted, and thereforethe exclusion of a right of appeal on that ground cannot be sought or found. Itis therefore clear that on the terms of the section a right of appeal cannot beexcluded in this case. 3. Appeal was sought to be excluded by reference to R.10(a) which we haveextracted supra. The proviso to that Rule bars a right of appeal under sub-r.(a)of R.5, which reads thus: "5. (a). If the assessee files no objections or produce no evidence in responseto the notice under R.4 within the time specified in the notice, the assessingauthority shall straightaway assess the party to Plantation Tax on the basis ofthe revised extent." It is obvious that the exclusion of the right of appeal by the Rule travels furtherthan the proviso to S.9(1). (a). If the assessee files no objections or produce no evidence in responseto the notice under R.4 within the time specified in the notice, the assessingauthority shall straightaway assess the party to Plantation Tax on the basis ofthe revised extent." It is obvious that the exclusion of the right of appeal by the Rule travels furtherthan the proviso to S.9(1). The argument of the learned Advocate General isthat an assessment made under sub-r.(a) of R.5 would be attracted by theprovisions of S 5, sub-s.(4) of the Act, an order under which is excluded fromthe right of appeal by reason of the proviso to S.9. To make good hissubmission, the learned Advocate General took us through a series ofSections, viz., S.3, 4 and 5. We do not think it necessary to extract thesesections. But we are satisfied that nothing contained in these sections canhelp to bring the order in question with which we are concerned, under theprovisions of sub-s.(4) of S.5 of the Act, so as to be excluded from the scope aright of appeal conferred by S.9. The learned Advocate General referred toS.27(2)(c) of the Act, which is as follows: "27(2). In particular and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoingpower, such rules may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely: xxxx xxxx xxxx (c) the procedure for revising the extent of plantations held by a person andprovision for appeals from orders in such provision; xxxx xxxx xxxx" It was argued that the power of making rules would extend to laying down theprocedure for recognition of extent of plantation and for providing for appealsfrom orders in such revision. This, it was said, would justify R.5 (a) of theRules. But, even then, if there is a conflict between S.9 of the Act and theproviso to R.10 (a) of the Rules, the Rule must yield to the Section. In thisview, we affirm the judgment of the learned Judge and dismiss the appeal withno order as to costs.