INCOME TAX EVADED

Taranaki Daily News, 2 December 1933, Page 12

INCOME TAX EVADED

FULL RETURNS NOT MADE CHRISTCHURCH PROSECUTION. FINES AMOUNT TO £56. Christchurch, Nov. 29. Charged with failing to furnish statements setting out all his assessable income for the years ended March, 1929, 1930, 1931 and 1932, William Alfred Mills, Christchurch, was fined £56 and costs in the Magistrate’s Court to-day by Mr. H. A. Young, S.M. It was stated that payment of nearly £l3OO had been evaded and that defendant had failed to supply complete returns from 1919 to the present day. His income during that period had been £17,506. Mr. A. W. Brown conducted the prosecution and defendant was represented by Mr. J. N. Macfarlane.

Mr. Brown said that in 1918 Mills was a* tailor in Ashburton. He came to Christchurch that year and worked for a company ? interested in pianos and machines. He had received taxable income from 1919 to the present, but had not furnished the required complete returns. Shortly after coming to Christchurch Mills bought the business and carried on under his own name until 1928. Then he went on a trip to England, disposing of the business, but retaining its book debts. “When he left New Zealand he had book debts amounting to the rather amazing total of £20,000,” continued counsel. “This sum was made up of hirepurchase accounts, agreements over pianos, machines and so on. Mills was In England for two years. . All the time he was away book debts were being collected. He returned to New Zealand in 1928, but went back to England shortly after. He returned to New Zealand some time this year. The interest he received from investments alone provided a tidy sum.” Following inquiry into defendant’s position by the Commissioner of Taxes the commissioner asked him to furnish returns, continued counsel. Two returns were provided, but failed to show his correct income, for income from book debts was not shown for one thing. The actual income received by Mills during 1932 was £475, but the return for that period showed an income of only £240. In 1930 his income was £413, and £250 was given in the return. Counsel read a statement of defendant’s income for each year from 1919 to 1933, which showed a total income of £17,506 Is Id. The total amount of tax evaded was £1292 19s lid. The only excuse Mills had was that he was ignorant of the law.

Mr. MacFarlane said that defendant was comparatively ignorant of business procedure. No doubt he would be able to pay a fine, and if required to pay the amount of the tax evaded or more. It might be something of a boon to the Government to receive such a big amount.

In fining defendant £5O and costs on the first charge, and £2 and costs on each of the other charges, the magistrate said the minimum penalty was £2, with a maximum of £lOO. The Commissioner of Taxes could call upon defaulters to pay treble the amount taxable. The proceedings should serve to impress upon the public the need .for making returns promptly.