SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 638, 15 October 1909, Page 11

SUPREME COURT.

i:^@^i^iOTTC4P^A|E^ DECIDED;; : ■: '■'■■■: J : T;K«ery'od,.judgment.- was .delivered, yesterday ■ ■:': ■ byline.: Supr'emo"G£urt in -the- case of the Com-. '>■';{ ."mis,Qucrf'Qi..Taxes'lvewusHh'i Nightcaps Coat ;iv.\':,.Cempanj% Limited,-which, case was'bqforo their ;t;':;;;,'Hpnd.u^ .i':;':T:C6'^pjt ! bn My. 27.. It was an-appeal fronv tho S; : .; V ;d?<#iotl! of. lIr;Vo/:GrmckShaiik,f S.M; ;(ln7cr: Y;'Vt. ,c'argril), : as to the method :of c6mputing':incpmp',f./,ta|i;6n'ithe;company's property.'■;';' ■ '' fitri'-JC/; S.' Lohguct (luverc'argill) appeared appellant.company, and'.Mr..Myers,for the 'respondent.',:- . -:--",.Y-''-.' '''"/.' ■-■ T I "■'; Mr,;justice Denniston said that, in.excavating coal .at the: company necessarily created?, open A JsfVrror gallorics .nithin; the,, mine?'.which > 'partially -.occupied' with rails on wtfibh itVconvoy the; coal from the actual workings to the pit month,-: These' old .workings extended, about'ono niile. nndva half in all. jit had'-'alsO," for the '"-necessary .upholding ofs'the/passages; and' of the- mine generally, 1 '/spent; large sums ■in heavily "timbering-' ' apd'stopping the,old workings,:and in draining the; mine.;. Outside the .mine: it,had .built a 'dwellipgrhohse.and. buthohsea for • the ; mirie' manager,-another; 'house : for. workmen,, '.and an•'engiiie-honse. with,b6iler and. gear. It■ had also constructed a railway- of over three miles ti „ 'Wjirid,;; with, the' necessary', stations and accewbribs. /'Also,, there was laid occupied;by machinery and..plant and used in; connection J ith i the / mining operations.: 'The assessment by thil;commissioner;on the : property;of the company;fdr income.tai made no deduction for business premises. . To . this' assessment the company".objected, .claiming that there should. bo a> deduction;from' the net; income shown' on the;{assessra'ent of 75 per cent, of the capital valuesof. tho company's: interest .in business premises ",;.'; Ce'rfaiu, itemS-thb. railway, with goodijheds,'.'station, 1 ; and(;other' ; 'a'ccessories,'--.'a. dnelling-hbuse^'fehcitig-iand; draining outside thft mine^were'excluded..by the magistrate; as not being used by tho company, exclusively in connection I with its business' as a coal compahr. The' magistrate ..held 'that' the; company, coutd deduct"s :per 'cent:...'on the capital value of. its place;-.of^business,'"that is,'.tho*mine and i tho buildings oh-'- tho surface: The percentage uastojbe calculated on the capital'value of the'wbrkjng mine and tho';buildings, .but not on the .value of the machinery, 'whether' fixed or nbt.l;;ilt was not disputed that'.this finding boyered and included'the 1 value of, the ungottbn coal and also of ; . the' rails, -'-.timbering, and,other;'.expendltnre'on the worked-out portion»of the mine, all of which the magishato'found to,bd; part of the business premises of the; company.:' From ;this finding I the commissioner appealed to tho'Supremo.Court. The reduction, .-.claifaed ,• by ;;tho j company ■ and al- ■ lowed ;;by.A the, magistrate," was provided . for by sofcfcioh'.SD.'; of 'the jLand : and , Income AsBtssmetit Act, 1908. .To comply fully with'thereguisitions Of the .section, the taxpayer must bo theVowner;of the.promises,'.which must be business :they;:niust;be actually occupiedl, pr.usedlby-him for the sole .purpbseVof his business,: and-theymuSt have been assessed fori land-tax' on'their capital, value.' ."Busirie«s premises',','; was ."not-.a' term,-'of art." Itwas a $term' : well; known'and? in'common uso jmong.ibusineSs men.v'ahd.if ja. business.man' m erejasked what'.he understood by the words he would, say.that they meant the'factor}, house,-.,'cpuntirig-hpuse,; br-other, building in which'-he "carried, on; his ■. business: or; the yard yscd rfor storage,■purpbses',i"or'«op'on. ''spaces, as, 'in, -^tanneries..and .'brickworks, in which ,he manufactured ; .his; goods.v.-.Ho would ■ certainly never, lnplnde'-the;, ungottbn minerals' or other raw ..;.material inihis mines, if: he possessed thom:;,,i(The' claim to. the'-tuigptlen coal had ""ke*! rbecn,'.abandoned, vby ■ ' Mr..:Xohguot—. though ,i,with/reluctance;;as. making a -some■fthltt'senous, breach'-inhis argumont.) Nor would?ho, think of 'including'.:as;:business pre-" miscsjlandover-which, he ranVa or tramwayi-by, which-tb'ponVey.'his'raw. material from j his, mine to tho'place where; he manu-factujed-it-oridolivered' lt.n'lt would'be absurd J° spaces left ; by excavating coal could He .called .thebusiness.'premise's 'of ".the coalowner, : ; and 'ithey .-.wero.icertainly.'not' ninde*6o' by having-rails laid down for: the'purpose of convoyuig: coal, to.the surface,,i s His was satisfied'that on no turn of* too .words, ."business premises"-would they .include'rany-rEart:;of.,.what. was..claimed as such, by. the company,, and that the appeal should'.'be allowedj with costs. -•■.-'•■: '■■"■■ •l,^i^. sti «« Ed^sil^P«d 'lbat'the appeal 3hould.be allowed; with ten guineas costs, and nujgested .that:^..application' shbuld. be' made' to 'he Assessment., Court, 'for" a as -l to fhethef the ~ppmpany .was. entitled ;to any eximptlofl.;, ■':■-./j'.;j:v.;■;,;■'.';.'.';':'!;'.r;.','''., •,.-..'. ■■,; * : Mr;-, Justice' v Cooper'.''coticurred "in. this ■ iudc^ uenw^:^:'K: : v,'.' 'va:'-a.". .■' -'■' .-. -v;-- :'....-