assessments. None of the grounds raised in the revision petition falls within Sections 218, 219 and 220 of the Act while questioning the proposed enhancement under the notice. Similarly, before the appellate authority i.e. Senior Civil Judge, no other point was urged in the grounds of appeal. The procedure contemplated under Sections 218 to 220 of the Act is a matter of evidence. If such question was urged before the revisional authority or at least before the appellate authority, the respondent will have an opportunity to produce material about compliance of Sections 218, 219 and 220 of the Act, but no such question was raised before the primary authority and the appellate authority, for the first time this Court cannot permit such plea in the second appeal, as, there was no opportunity for the respondent to produce evidence before the revisional authority and appellate authority to establish compliance of Sections 218 and 220 of the Act. Hence, the question of non compliance of Sections 218 and 220 of the Act cannot be permitted to be urged before this Court for the first time in the second appeal. Therefore, I hold that the appellant is not entitled to raise such question for the first time in the second appeal and on that ground the appeal cannot be allowed. Accordingly, these points are answered against the appellant and in favour of the respondent.
