FULL COURT.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 643, 21 October 1909, Page 11

FULL COURT.

. .. AN EXTENSIVE-CLAIM.., f'AtV a-sitting of the Full Court'yesterday, •their. Honours Justices Williams,- fienniston, Edwards. Coopor, and Chapman presiding, tho ,CaSB : of-Thomas Borthwick and. Sons (Aus'tralasia), Limited,. Versus iho Comtaissionot of. (Taxes'' was argued. The claim t involves an -ii'inotlnt ofrbotwoeh WS3OOO and JMOOO.. : Mr.' J. 'H. Hoskirig, K.C., and Jlr. G. Har ; . WMri- appeared * for tho appellant, and Jtr.. Ti:' W. Stringorj. K.C., and Mr. Myers 'for . tho respondent. ■; .' The- Cass . was- brought in tho form! ofan' ! appeal';from::.-at. decision iof'ithe -.mngistvatetoh . Christchurch, 'dismissing .'bbjee'tidns ''made by tho appellants in regard-to'-tho"ossessmtmt of.incomo. tax npoii ■ tho ihcomo.deriyediby. them as agents ..for, .Thomas . Borthwick. and Sons.', Ltd., of London... Objection : had ..been; taken to tho assessment .of income from thp.business oftho London company.in \New : Zealand. during 1000,; 1007, and 1008. It was stated; for the information of . the Court, , that appellants' had boeii-called upon by the commissioner to furnisli foturns' for these years, but they: had made no .-returns' and given' no.'information to tho Com- ' miSsumor as to tho volnme of business trans-' feted-.fertile London' company,;in .;New Zea-' i land. .-The Commissioner,therefore assessed the incomei .of tho London 'company for tho purposes I .Pf':U).cpmo : tar for'. the.ie years at tho. sums of . <£27,431, '<£65,225, aid'.EW.GGO; respectively. Appellants objected.to.Jthis.. Upon 'v4riOus--teehbieal; grounds,-'but; the, objections had .bean dismissed by the magistrate. The London company had been .registered in. Ltridop on'-Octobor 2,-1905,-and the Australasia 1 com-' •pany on July, IJ, 1905.-' The, London J company carried-on business'^with.New Zealand -throWi tile Australasia company Tho dirootors of - the two companies .wore .tho same, Ond-;;tho 'shareholders ? substantially:- tho '• Same. Tho. Australasia- compa'ny,; besides.-carrying oh • :bjisiness in New' Zealand -as -agents--' 'for the London ■ company, owned and worked .two freez- • i n S. works—at- Pi\ki.Paki,and at-Waitara. The Ijondotl .company - sold to-.freezing companies in New Zealand through' the Australasia 1 company,. : atid • also - sold',-tortlie latter,-comp.iny. . There- , .was .a'yholes.Alb'.markct ;in -New 'Zealand' for. frozen:'mutton.-' objections wero: : (1) Tint for. :the years mentioned there were . 'no profits 1 proved to; have ;bcen received by ap-. pellanta'in Now Zealand in respect,to any:of ;the transactions mentioned;, (2) : that it 'wm."not proved-;that tho"{raiisiietiops' mentioned were sales withinvNowi'-Zealond :-', and-, there - were other objections of a technical nature founded > nport.the-wording of various; ; sections ,of the Land, atid . Income-Assessment Act, 1008. '»' /, - xiThe 'Courtihcard atgumenton botli sides, :nniV flecided'.to 'odjOurii tKe'-inying orjiidgment \intil . fo-diiy, -in; order- that .they, might consider .the I precise-form of tKe',"'oVd£irt(r'-l)e mtulo*""-'-" ; •