RETURN OF INCOME TAX

Taranaki Daily News, 3 October 1929, Page 7

RETURN OF INCOME TAX

FAILURE TO FURNISH DETAILS. FOUR CONVICTIONS ENTERED. A minimum fine of £2, with court costs 10s and a minimum solicitor’s fee of £l.ls, was inflicted upon George Garland Newell, Alexander and George Miller Galloway, Stanley Egmont Nielson . and Sydney Roy Lovell by Mr. R. W. Tate, S.M., in the New Plymouth Police Court yesterday, for failing to furnish income tax returns as required by the provisions of the Land and Income Tax Act. All the defendants pleaded guilty and on behalf of the Commissioner of Taxes Mr. S. Grayling said these were the first prosecutions made this year for failure the furnish income tax returns, the previous prosecutions having been made. in respect of land tax returns. The informations were made to give publicity to the necessity for a return of income being provided if the income was over £250. The . practice of not making returns by the required date as advertised by the Commissioner of Taxes caused tremendous trouble and. expense to the department.. The due date for the furnishing of returns was widely, enough advertised, and this year had been in addition broadcast by the Radio Broadc .sting Company. Nielson/continued Mr. Grayling had been late in making his returns for the past five years and the returns had been made each time only after a default assessment was made. Lovell’s returns had been late for three years, Newell’s for four years, and Galloway Bros.’ for six years, and then only in response to default assessments. For Nielson, Mr. L. M. Moss said the time for furnishing the return was so soon after the end of the financial year that many business men found it awkward and were 'unable to make the necessary returns until later in the year. The offence was not due to neglect but the case was that of a busy man who, while making returns for others, had not been able to find time to make his own. As light a penalty as possible was inflicted by the magistrate, who remarked that the maximum * fine was much heavier than £2, and that in some courts a solictor’s fee of £3 3s had been allowed.