JUDGMENT : Satish Chandra CJ. and Yashoda Nandan, JJ. In Hafij Wajid Ali v. Municipal Board 1961 AWR 3 D.S. Mathur, J. held that before the recovery of water tax by a Municipal Board, an assessment list must be prepared in accordance with Section 141 of the U.P. Municipalities Act-hereinafter referred to as the Act-which should be published for objection under Sections 142 and 143, and after the objections had been heard, should be finalised u/s 144 of the Act. 2. In the subsequent case of Lala Jagdish Prasad v. Administrator, Municipal Board, Saharanpur 1961 AWR 262, S.N. Dwivedi, J. took a contrary view and held that: The expression in Sub-section (1) of Section 141 a tax on buildings or lands' refers, to put it in my own words, to the land and building tax and not to the water tax and consequently the assessment list, required to be prepared under that section, of all buildings and lands is the assessment list for the purpose of assessing tax on lands and buildings under Clause (i) of Sub-section (1) of Section 128. Section 141 does not, in my opinion, require the Board to prepare an assessment list in regard to water tax. 3. In view of the divergence of opinion on the question whether a Municipal Board can levy water tax without preparing an assessment list in accordance with the provisions of Sections 141 to 144 of the Act, a learned single Judge has made this reference for resolution of the conflict between the two decisions. 4. Section 128 of the Act confers on Municipal Board of the State power to impose various taxes enumerated therein. While Clause (i) of Section 128(1) empowers Boards to impose 'a tax on the annual value of buildings or lands or of both', Clause (x) thereof provides for imposition of 'a water tax on the annual value of buildings or lands or of both'. While Clause (i) of Section 128(1) empowers Boards to impose 'a tax on the annual value of buildings or lands or of both', Clause (x) thereof provides for imposition of 'a water tax on the annual value of buildings or lands or of both'. A comparison of the two clauses shows that while Clause (i) is concerned with a tax simplicity on the annual value of the buildings or lands or both (usually called house tax'), Clause (x) relates to water tax, though the basis for computing it also is the annual value of buildings or lands or of both, A Municipal Board has power to levy other taxes, the basis of the determination of which also is the annual value of buildings or lands or of both as would be clear from a reading of Sections 149 and 150 of the Act which indicate that scavenging tax (clause xi) and conservancy tax (clause xii) are also assessed on the annual value of buildings or lands or of both. Section 140 of the Act not only defines “annual value” but also lays down the manner of its determination differently for the two clauses of buildings or lands contemplated by Clauses (a) and (b) of Sub-section (1). Sub Section (1) of Section 141, to the extent relevant for our purposes, is in the following words: Preparation of assessment list: (1) When a tax on buildings or lands or both is Imposed, the board shall cause an assessment list of all buildings or lands or both in the municipality to be prepared, containing (a) the name of the street or mohalla in which the property is situate; (b) the designation, of the property, either by name or by numbers sufficient for identification; (c) the names of the owner and occupier, if known; (d) the annual letting value or other particulars determining the annual value; and (e) the amount of the tax assessed thereon.” (emphasis supplied) 5. It is noticeable that the opening words of Section 141(1) are identical with Section 128(1)(i) of the Act indicating that the assessment list, the preparation of which is required by Section 141, relates to the tax contemplated by the latter provision. Section 142 requires the publication of the assessment list prepared u/s 141 and Section 143 gives a tight to those affected by the list to file objections to the valuations and assessments entered therein. Section 142 requires the publication of the assessment list prepared u/s 141 and Section 143 gives a tight to those affected by the list to file objections to the valuations and assessments entered therein. Thus the entries made under Clauses (d) and (e) of Sub-section (1) of Section 141 in the assessment list are open to challenge in proceedings u/s 143. After disposal of the objections u/s 143 and necessary amendments having been made therein, the assessment list so prepared has to be authenticated in the manner provided for by Section 144 and has to be declared open by public notice for inspection. According to Section 145 the valuations and assessment entered in the list remain effective subject to any alterations or amendments made therein u/s 147 and to the result of any appeal u/s 160 till the preparation of a fresh assessment list. Section 146 runs as follows: Conclusiveness of entries in list-An entry in an assessment list shall be conclusive proof (a)? for any purpose connected with a tax to which the list refers, of the amount leviable in respect of any building or land during the period to which the list relates, and (b) for the purpose of assessing any other municipal tax, on the annual value of any building or land during the said period.” (emphasis supplied) 6. As already observed, the list prepared u/s 141 relates to the tax which the Municipal Board is empowered to impose u/s 128(1)(i). By reason of Clause (a) of Section 146, the entry envisaged by Section 141(1)(e) is conclusive proof of the amount of 'house-tax' assessed on any particular building or land. For other taxes, like water-tax, scavenging tax and conservancy tax assessed on the basis of the 'annual value' the entry regarding the annual letting value or other particulars determining annual value envisaged by Clause (d) of Sub-section (1) alone is conclusive proof of the same. The actual amount of such taxes payable is computed according to the rate fixed by Rules sanctioned by the State Government after the procedure prescribed by Section 131 and allied provisions has been followed. 7. The actual amount of such taxes payable is computed according to the rate fixed by Rules sanctioned by the State Government after the procedure prescribed by Section 131 and allied provisions has been followed. 7. In our opinion the provisions of the Act surveyed above leave no room for doubt that the assessment list in accordance with Sections 141 to 144 has to be prepared only few the purposes of house-tax and a water tax can be imposed and levied without complying with those sections. 8. In Hafiz Wajid Ali's case D.S. Mathur, J. was persuaded to hold that water-tax could not be charged by a Municipal Board without complying with Sections 141 to 144 on account of considerations expressed in the following words: As no house-tax is imposed on State owned buildings, no assessment list shall be prepared with regard to such buildings, and there would be no material before the Board for assessing water-tax on such buildings. 9. No such difficulty as noticed by the learned Judge in our view exists. If a Board has imposed a house-tax it will necessarily prepare an assessment list for its purposes in accordance with Sections 141 to 144 and the entries therein regarding the annual value would be conclusive proof of the same by virtue of Section 146(b) for the purposes of water-tax also. There is nothing in the Act preventing Boards from requiring objections being filed by the State Government and other owners of property exempt from house-tax to the valuation of the property u/s 143 before finalization of the list. Moreover, a particular Municipal Board may choose to impose water-tax but no house-tax. In such a situation if, as held by us, preparation of an assessment list in accordance with Sections 141 to 144 is necessary only for assessing house-tax, there would be no such assessment list at all. There would nonetheless be no difficulty in assessing buildings and lands for water-tax because in such cases Rules will necessarily have to be framed for assessing the tax u/s 153(a) of the Act. 10. We are in respectful disagreement with the judgment in Hafiz Wajid Ali v. Municipal Board (supra) and are of the opinion that Lala Jagdish Prasad v. Administrator, Municipal Board (supra) was correctly decided for the reasons given in the decision. 11. 10. We are in respectful disagreement with the judgment in Hafiz Wajid Ali v. Municipal Board (supra) and are of the opinion that Lala Jagdish Prasad v. Administrator, Municipal Board (supra) was correctly decided for the reasons given in the decision. 11. Our opinion shall be returned to the teamed single Judge for deciding the appeal on merits.