Ritendrakanto Lahiri Chaudhury And ... vs Dhirendrakanto Lahiri Chaudhury And ... on 13 January, 1943
22. A notice like this is not a mere matter of procedure. Its issue and service is an essential fact on the existence of which the Collector's power is made dependent. In an analogous case, it was held by this Court that the service of notice under Section 16 of the Act was not merely a matter of procedure but was part of the law with reference to which valuation or revaluation as contemplated by law could be made by the revenue authorities and liability imposed regarding payment of cesses. Failure to serve notice under the section was held to invalidate the assessment : Secretary of State v. Jitendra Nath Roy (Guha and Bartley JJ.). It was held that the notice was imperative and where it was not served the person assessed became entitled to a declaration from the civil Court that the cess valuation was ultra vires and illegal.