Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

LAND TAX ASSESSMENT

TEST CASE VERDICT

APPEAL BY THEATRE

COMPANY

AMENDMENT ACT OF T936

An appeal against a Supreme Court judgment upholding the land tax assessment of the Commissioner of Taxes against the De Luxe Theatre Co., Ltd., Was brought to the Court of Appeal today. The point at issue, which affects much property in Wellington and elsewhere, involves the interpretation of the Land and Income Tax Amendment Act, 1936, which made land tax payable by lessees in respect of their leasehold properties as if they were freehold. On the Bench were the Chief Justice (Sir Michael Myers), Mr. Justice Ostler, Mr. Justice Smith, and Mr. Justice Fair. Mr. C. H. Weston, K.C., with him Mr. R. St. J. Beere, appeared for the appellant company, and Mr. P. B. Broad for the Commisiorier of Taxes. For the purpose of swelling the receipts from land tax, the Amendment Act of 1936 made land tax payable by lessees in respect of their leasehold properties as if they were freehold. The taxpayer is credited with the amount of tax payable by the owner of the freehold, who is also obliged to pay tax in respect of the land; but the addition of leasehold to his freehold in many cases involves him in payment of graduated land tax, and also brings him within the maximum rate of 6d in the £. The Amendment Act came into force on October 6, 1936, but was expressly made retrospective to April 1, 1936. As land tax is assessed and levied in respect of land owned by the taxpayer at noon on the preceding March 31, the question arose as to whether taxpayers holding land on March -31, 1936, were liable for tax for the year beginning on April 1, 1936. The company argued in the Supreme Court that, in order to bring it within the net, the amendment should have been made retrospective to March 31, 1936, and the Commissioner contended that the intention of the Act was sufficiently clear by implication to include anyone owning leasehold land on March 31, 1936. Mr. Justice Reed, in his judgment, j said the question resolved itself into whether the Legislature had sufficiently expressed its intention that the amendment should apply to the position as existing on March 31, 1936. He thought it had, first, because the amendment was declaratory, and, second, because the general scope arid purview of the amendment was to make the amendment applicable to leasehold land held on March 31, 1936. Where ah Act was in its nature declaratory, the presumption against construing it retrospec- J tively was inapplicable.

Legal argument iri the Court of Appeal is being heard.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19390314.2.107

Bibliographic details

Evening Post, Volume CXXVII, Issue 61, 14 March 1939, Page 11

Word Count
442

LAND TAX ASSESSMENT Evening Post, Volume CXXVII, Issue 61, 14 March 1939, Page 11

LAND TAX ASSESSMENT Evening Post, Volume CXXVII, Issue 61, 14 March 1939, Page 11