SALES TAX

Hokitika Guardian, 28 September 1933, Page 2

SALES TAX

MAGISTRATE’S COMMENT. a (Per Press Association —Copyright). CHRISTCHURCH, September 27. At .the hearing oi tlie Sales, Tax case, Mr C. O. Trownson (Collector of Customs and Sales Tax) asked for a conviction on all three of • the charges, as a warning to other firms. He did not ask tor a fine.

The Magistrate: “Yes but the Act fixes a minimum penalty. I cannot fine the defendant less than- £25 on each charge if I convict him. Why does the Department not prosecute other firms? You bring three, charges and, apparently, ask me to fine this ‘defendant £75 as a warning! Why pick on this particular firm?” Mr Trownson said that the Department intended to prosecute other firms which had been guilty of an offence. The Department was not prosecuting as a warning altogether, Tlie Department regarded the offence as serious.

The Magistrate: “Of course .it is serious, and the Act provides for its seriousness, but you want to rub v . it in by prosecuting three times over!” The Magistrate, after further discussion with Mr Trownson said that the Department had apparently Imposed on the defendant a 15 per) cent penalty, which it had no right; to impose. Provided that the tax ivore •paid on the day that the return was made, remission of 5 per cent was allowed for .in the Act, and if the tax were not paid within two months of the making of the return, a ten per cent penalty was payable. The defendant had complied with the conditions, hut had not been allowed the discount, and the penalty had been charged later: The Magistrate remarked that, as the defendant- had bungled the whole matter, it was questionable whether any penalty should be imposed.

Eventually two of the charges were withdrawn, and the Magistrate reserved his decision on the third. This, he said, would enable counsel for the defendant to. apply for a refund of "the penalties, and for the remission of the minimum fine, •