THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO C.M.S.A.No. 89 of 2005 ORDER: This appeal arises out of the judgment of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam in T.A.No.305 of 2001 dated 28.09.2004 wherein the appeal was dismissed confirming the enhancement of tax on the ground that the statutory requirement under Section 282 (2) (d) of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act (for short “the Act”) was not complied with before filing of the appeal or during the pendency of the appeal. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that Section 282 of the Act is not applicable, since the appellant is challenging only the assessment. The above contention of the learned counsel for the appellant cannot be accepted since the tax will be imposed consequent upon the assessment and the attack on the tax is only with regard to the method of assessment. Therefore, the assessment by itself does not give rise to cause of action and appeal arises only after fixation of the tax. When such an order is under challenge, Section 282 (2) (d) of the Act mandates that the disputed tax has to be paid before hearing of the appeal or during the pendency of the appeal. As found by the appellate Court, the mandatory requirement of depositing differential tax was not complied with by the appellant. Therefore, the appellate court rightly dismissed the appeal. This Court does not find any reason to interfere with the judgment of the appellate Court. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. No costs. N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO,J Dt. 23.06.2011 lvl THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO C.M.S.A.No. 89 of 2005 Dt. 23.06.2011 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO C.M.S.A.No. 7 of 2004 Dt. 23.06.2011