Collco Dealings, Ltd v Commissioners of Inland Revenue
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judgment Date | 06 May 1959 |
| Date | 06 May 1959 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Northern Ireland) |
HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION)-
Income Tax - Claim to exemption upheld by Special Commissioners - Case demanded by Crown - Whether tax repayable forthwith - Income Tax Act, 1952 (15 & 16 Geo. VI & 1 Eliz. II, c. 10), Sections 63 (2) and 64 (10) and Eighteenth Schedule, Part III, Paragraph 4.
The Plaintiffs claimed exemption from tax under Paragraph 4 of Part III of the Eighteenth Schedule to the Income Tax Act, 1952, on the grounds that they were resident in the Irish Republic and not in the United Kingdom, and the Special Commissioners, on appeal, upheld the claim and made an order for the repayment of the tax suffered by them. The Crown demanded a Case for the opinion of the High Court(1); and the Plaintiffs claimed repayment forthwith of the tax in question.
Held,
Held, that, the Crown having demanded a Case, the Plaintiffs had not the right to recover the tax forthwith.
The cases came before Donovan, J., in the Queen's Bench Division on 6th May, 1959, when judgment was given in favour of the Crown, with costs.
Donovan, J.-I am concerned in this case only with the alleged right of the Plaintiffs, for which there is no direct statutory authority, to recover sums of Income Tax from the Defendants forthwith, notwithstanding that the decision of the Special Commissioners, who allowed the Plaintiffs' repayment claims, is in dispute and under appeal to the High Court.
At the end of their written decision, the Special Commissioners said this:
We accordingly made an order for repayment
,
and then go on to specify the sum. It is £118,362 10s. in the case of Collco Dealings, Ltd., and £31,746 11s. 3d. in the case of Lucbor Dealings, Ltd. The present claim is based, first of all, upon this "order". Such order for repayment is not embodied in any separate document, and it would rather seem that the Special Commissioners regarded themselves as having inherent power to make it as a necessary consequence of their decision in law that the claim was made out. I respectfully doubt this. Where a disputed claim for what I might call the
ordinary reliefs from tax-personal allowance, earned income allowance and so on-is resolved in favour of the taxpayer, the Act confers express power on the Special Commissioners to "issue an order for repayment" where too much tax has been paid by deduction or otherwise-see Section 224 of the Income Tax Act, 1952, and the provisions of the Sixth Schedule. The provisions I am now considering, however, are those contained in Paragraph 4 of Part III of the Eighteenth Schedule, and no corresponding power to issue an order for repayment is there contained. The words simply are, so far as the Commissioners of Inland Revenue are concerned, that theyshall, on proof of the facts to their satisfaction, allow the claim accordingly.
And where a disputed claim is taken by way of appeal to the Special Commissioners, those Commissioners...
To continue reading
Request your trial