TAX EVASION.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIX, Issue 153, 1 July 1938, Page 8

TAX EVASION.

FINES TOTAL £50.

S.M. SETTLES POINT.

COMPANY'S IJABILITY.

A fortnight ago when Robert Mar-hall, company director, was lined £2."i in tile Police Court on each of two breaches of tlic Sales Tax Art liMl-M. by making declarations that were erroneous in certain particulars. Marshall and Baxter. Limited, a companv m liquidation, was also dialled with two similar breaches of the same Act. It was submitted by Mr. L. P. Learv. who appeared for defendant company at the hearing, that the Sales Tax Aoi presupposed that both parties could he guilty, the company and the person responsible for the erroneous declaration, and that the Companies Act provided that, the assets of a companv in liquidation could not !«• touched, except by leave ot the Supreme Court. The magistrate. Mr. C. I!. o, r Walker. reserved his decision after heariii" the submissions of Mr. Learv and Mr. K. , Meredith, who prosecuted on In-half of the Collector of Customs, the informant m the proceedings. In <ri\in<r Jij s decision tn-dav Mr Orr Walker said that Mr. ' Learv admitted the facts, but raised tic defence that the two informations were proceedings within the meaning of Section 225 „f the Companies Act, I!).{.{. and therefore that the informations could -jot he heard or proceeded witii without the consent of the Supreme Court. After referring at length to this section, the magistrate said Section 2i~> did not prohibit the Crown from proceedings to prove the atle-ed breaches.

'Neither does it prohibit this Court from deciding whether breaches have been committed."' he added. "In view of the admissions of defendant company, and the provisions of the Sales Tax Act in regard to presumptions which have not been rebutted, I must convict on lioth charges and impose the minimum fine of £2T» in each case. No order will be made for payment of costs."