ORDER N.K. Agarwal, J. 1. Legality and propriety of the order dated 19.12.1989, passed by the District Judge, Durg, in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 16/89, whereby the appeal preferred by the applicant under Section 149 of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act') has been rejected and the order dated 06.02.1989, passed by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Durg, has been upheld, is under assail in this revision. 2. The facts giving rise to this revision are that: the applicant purchased a house at Gwalipara, Ward No. 26, Durg, vide registered sale deed dated 15.04.82. Old house was assessed to property tax @ 90.12 rupees per year. Old house was demolished, new house was constructed after obtaining sanction from the Respondent/corporation. The Respondent issued a notice under Section 144 of the Act on 24.01.86, asking applicant to furnish information in the proforma attached to above notice. The applicant furnished the above information on 31.01.86. On 25.08.87, a bill was presented to the applicant demanding Rs. 12,545.60 as property tax of the year 1986-87 and 1987-88 under Section 173 of the Act. The applicant raised an objection on 03.09.87. Vide order dated 06.02.89, the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Durg, dismissed the above objection and an appeal preferred there-against by the applicant under Section 149 of the Act was dismissed by the District Judge, Durg vide order impugned dated 19.12.1989. Hence this revision. 3. Shri Alok Bakhshi, learned Counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the property tax has been assessed without following the mandatory provisions of issuing notice under Section 146 of the Act; without considering and deciding the objections raised by the Petitioner, the same has been assessed only on the basis of survey report which is inadmissible, and the learned District Judge, Durg, has also affirmed the order passed by the Commissioner without appreciating the contentions of the applicant, and, the order impugned for assessment of property tax deserves to be set aside. 4. On the other hand, Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent would submit that no notice is required under Section 146 of the Act. The property tax was assessed after giving due opportunity of hearing to the applicant and after considering the objections raised by him. 4. On the other hand, Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent would submit that no notice is required under Section 146 of the Act. The property tax was assessed after giving due opportunity of hearing to the applicant and after considering the objections raised by him. The Commissioner has rightly dismissed the objection raised by the applicant, the District Judge, Durg, has also rightly dismissed the appeal and the order impugned deserves to be upheld. 5. I have heard the counsel appearing for the parties and perused the order impugned. 6. The point for consideration before this Court is whether or not the property tax has been assessed in accordance with law after affording due opportunity of hearing to the applicant. 7. As per scheme of the Act, for the imposition of property tax, owner and/or, occupier of land or building is required to furnish information regarding name and place of abode of the owner or occupier of such land or building and regarding measurement or the gross annual rent or revenue or the description or other specified details or the actual cost or estimated market value of such land or building. 8. As per Section 145(1) of the Act, after completing the valuation of land and buildings in any ward under Section 143 of the Act, the Commissioner shall cause the respective valuations to be entered in a list and give public notice of the place where such list may be inspected. As per Section 145(2), the Commissioner shall at the same time and in the same manner, give public notice of a date, not being less then thirty days from the publication of such notice by which objections to the amount of any annual value or other particulars entered in the assessment list may be delivered at his office. 9. Under Section 146 of the Act, the Commissioner shall, in all cases in which any land or building is for the first time valued, or in which the valuation of any land or building previously valued as increased under Section 143 give special notice thereof, to the occupier of the same, and when the valuation is so increased, the said notice shall contain a statement of grounds of the increase. Under Section 147 of the Act, any person dissatisfied with the valuation made under this chapter may deliver at the municipal office a written notice stating the grounds of his objection of such valuation. Further, as per Section 147(2), notice shall be delivered on or before the date fixed in this behalf in the public notice referred to in Section 145 or 146 of the Act. 10. Section 148 of the Act provides that all such objections shall be entered in a register to be maintained for the purpose and, on receipt of any objection; the Commissioner shall give a notice in writing to the objector of the time and place at which his objection will be investigated. Under Section 148(3), when the objection has been determined, the order passed on such objection shall be recorded in the said register and, if necessary, an amendment made in the assessment list in accordance with the result of the objection. Under Section 149, the liability of any land or building to assessment or as to the basis or principle of assessment or as to the amount of tax assessed, an appeal shall lie from the decision of the Municipal Commissioner to the District Judge, whose decision shall be final, and Section 150 provides every valuation made by the Commissioner under Section 143 shall subject to the provisions of Sections 148 and 149 be final. Under Section 151, the annual value fixed under this chapter shall be entered in one or more registers to be kept ward-wise or in any other manner. 11. Section 152 provides when objections have been determined and appeals disposed of and the entries required by Section 151 have been made, the assessment list shall be authenticated by the Commissioner, who shall certify under his signature that except in the cases in which amendments have been made as shown therein, no valid objection has been made to the annual values entered in the said list. Further, Section 153 empowers the Commissioner to amend the assessment list by the inclusion, omission or substitution of any matter. Further, Section 153 empowers the Commissioner to amend the assessment list by the inclusion, omission or substitution of any matter. As per Section 173, when any amount declared by or under the provisions of this Act to be recoverable in the manner provided in this chapter, or payable on account of any tax imposed within the limits of the city shall have become due, the Commissioner shall with the least practicable delay cause to be presented to any person liable for the payment thereof a bill for the sum claimed as due. As per Section 173(2), every such bill shall specify the period for which and the property, occupation or thing in respect of which the sum is claimed, and shall also give notice of the liability incurred in default of payment and the time within which an objection may be preferred as against such claim. 12. Now, reverting to the facts of the case, it would be clear that neither public notice was given under Section 145, nor notice under Section 146 of the Act has been sent to the applicant mentioning therein how and in what manner the property tax has been assessed. Section 146 of the Act has two parts; one is regarding valuation of land or building which is valued for the fist time and the other part is regarding valuation of any land or building previously valued but the valuation has been increased under Section 143 of the Act. Neither public notice was issued under Section 145 of the Act nor special notice under Section 146 of the Act has been sent to the applicant and there was no occasion for the applicant to prefer an objection under Section 147 of the Act. It is not correct to say that cases in which assessment is to be made for the first time. Section 146 of the Act has no application. 13. It appears that since no notice was sent under Sections 145 and 146 of the Act, there was no occasion for the Commissioner to investigate into the objection under Section 148 of the act. 14. The Respondent corporation is bound to give statement of grounds of assessment of property tax. Section 146 of the Act has no application. 13. It appears that since no notice was sent under Sections 145 and 146 of the Act, there was no occasion for the Commissioner to investigate into the objection under Section 148 of the act. 14. The Respondent corporation is bound to give statement of grounds of assessment of property tax. The objection raised herein by the applicant was in-fact against the notice sent by the Respondent under Section 173 of the Act and not under Section 147 of the Act, as no notice was sent under Sections 145 or 146 of the Act, and therefore, the tax was assessed and entered into the list under Section 151 of the Act and authenticated by the Commissioner under Section 152 without following the procedure prescribed under Section 148 of the Act. These aspects of the matter have not been considered by the District Judge, Durg, while hearing the appeal. 15. No tax can be imposed without affording proper opportunity of hearing in terms of statutory provisions. Giving of notice under Section 146 and investigation of the objection raised under Section 147 of the Act is not an empty formality but a mandatory duty is cast upon the Commissioner to hear and determine the objections. Nothing has been done in the instant case, and therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court, the impugned order of assessment of property tax being passed in contravention of provisions of law is illegal and deserves to be quashed. 16. In view of above, the impugned order of assessment of Property Tax is quashed. The Municipal Corporation, Durg, shall decide the objection of the applicant afresh in terms of Section 148 of the Act after affording an opportunity to the objector/applicant to substantiate his objections by placing the evidence documentary or oral, and thereafter shall determine the amount of property tax for the year 1986-87 and 87-88. No order as to costs.