WAGES TAX CASES

Taupo Times, Volume III, Issue 105, 29 January 1954, Page 5

WAGES TAX CASES

MAGISTRATE'S WARNING At the Magistrate's Court, Taupo on Friday, January 22, before Mr W. A. Harlow, S.M., George Te Puke Chase, contractor, of Taupo, faced four charges under the Social Security Act 1938. On the Bench with His Worship was Mr R. Anderson Bak, J.P. The charges alleged that wages tax deducted from employees' wages had been applied for a purpose other than payment of the tax, payment not being denoted by I cancellation of stamps and the amount of the tax not paid. Mr Roe appeared for the Social Security Department. On the case being called there was no appearance of defendant, and the police sfated that he had sent a letter saying that he was busy he could not attend but wished to plead guilty.

Warrant for Arrest His Worship pointed out that the offence was one in which he had no jurisdiction unless the defendant appeared and elected to be dealt with summarily, as he had a right to trial by jury. He then | adjourned the Court in order to issue a warrant for the arrest of defendant. Chase was later brought before the Court, elected summary trial and pleaded guilty, being represented by Mr Morrissey. Mr Roe stated that the charges arose from an investigation of defendant's books, which showed that tax deducted from wages had not been accounted for and had not yet been paid.

For defendant, Mr Morrissey said that his accounts had been kept in a haphazard way. A daughter aged seventeen had kept the books. Money deducted from wages for tax had been set aside and in some way had been overlooked and mixed with other moneys. Chase had not been in trouble before in a criminal way. The Magistrate stated that the offence was a very serious one, for which the penaly was imprisonment up to twelve months or a fine of £100". He would have to consider whether or not to impose a term of imprisonment and would remand I defendant in custody for a probation ofhcer's report. On the Court resuming after lunch, the magistrate said that having received the report he considered that on this occasion the imposition of a fine would meet the case. Any further cases involving defrauding public revenues of taxation moneys extracted from employees would earn gaol sentences. Defendant was fined amounts totalling £15, with costs and solicitor's fees a further £16/12/-, the total to be paid within 14 days.