INCOME TAX CASE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20418, 26 May 1928, Page 11

INCOME TAX CASE.

SYSTEMATIC UNDERSTATEMENT. FINES OF £125 IMPOSED. (Special to Daily Times.) AUCKLAND, May 25. Fines totalling £125 were imposed on Alexander Shand, a baker at Huntley, who was charged in the Police Court today with wi.fullv makintr false returns of the income derived by him for five years from March, 1923 to March, 1927. Pleas of not guilty /were entered on all charges. . Holding Shand guilty, and imposing fines of £25 on each count, Mr F, KHunt, S.M., said: “ I am satisfied that the defendant knew perfectly well what he was doing.' He was banking plenty of money and returning false particulars to hoodwink the department. If that.-ia not wilful I do not know what is. This should make people like this return hocost statements. The minimum Jane for one offence is £2. and the maximum £ioo. The figures put forward by Mr Hflbple for the Income Tax Department showed divergencies in the return made', by Shand and that assessed after investigation by an inspector of the department. The following were the returns made' Shand and the assessed income in parentheses:—l923 £361 (£1250) ; 1924, £387 (£1250); 1925, £4BB (£1007) ; 1926, J 694 (£1350) : 1527, £506 (£1400). The-tgx naid bv Shand in 1923 was £1 3s 2d, in 1 9~4 18s 3d. in 1925 £4 18s 9d, in 1926 £2 4s, and in 1927 10s lid. The tax payable according to the inspectorial return was £7O 3s 6d, £SB 12s Id, £44 0s 7d. £65 18s 3d, and £B7 IQs 3d; a total deficiency of £307 19s 7d. Cross-examined by Mr Hubble, Shand admitted that sums of money which he paid into his Post Office Savings Bank account came out of the business. - “Did it not dawn on you that- you were gradually accumulating wealthy—that vou were getting rich? ” asked counsel. Shand answered that he bad ijot thought of it. Mr Hubble; Did it not occur to you that you were getting oS remarkably • lightly when your tax was only 10s and £1 and £4? Mr Terry (counsel for the defendant): He did not know much about income tax. Mr Hubble: I think he knew » lot about it. Mr Terry: He does now. . , “Did you know your books were ,aH wrong ? ’’ asked Mr Hubble. ' - V " Witness : I thought they were right. Mr Terry: He thought he had to return income after the business had been run. Whether the explanation is jgpod, bad, or indifferent it is his statement, and you must accept it. lam asking your Worship to believe that Shand put in his return, no doubt haphazardly, hut. as he thought, correctly. He ia a thrifty, industrious baker, but his knowledge of accountancy is elementary," and no conscious effort was made by film to defraud the department. The business was run as a partnership between Shand and his wife. All her moneys were intermingled with his. Even although on figures the returns as rendered are ..ln■correct I ask you to believe that he did not do it wilfully, and the charges'we have to answer are that incorrect returns were wilfnllv made. . The Magistrate gave judgment ;«» stated above. .