Inspector of Taxes v Arida Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Egan, J.
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1996
• Neutral Citation: 1995 WJSC-SC 2479
• Court: Supreme Court
• Docket Number: [S.C. No. 266 of 1992]
• Date: 01 January 1996

1995 WJSC-SC 2479

THE SUPREME COURT

Egan, J.

Blayney, J.

Denham, J.

(266/92)

INSPECTOR OF TAXES v. ARIDA LTD

REVENUE

BETWEEN:-

INSPECTOR OF TAXES

APPELLANT

-and-

ARIDA LIMITED

RESPONDENT

Citations:

INCOME TAX ACT 1967 S428

INCOME TAX ACT 1967 S430

INCOME TAX ACT 1967 S429

CORPORATION TAX ACT 1976 S58(3)

FINANCE ACT 1980 S42

CCR O.58 r1

INCOME TAX ACT 1967 S429(2)

INCOME TAX ACT 1967 PART XXVI

INCOME TAX ACT 1967 S428(6)

MIN FOR LANDS & FISHERIES, STATE V SEALY 1939 IR 21

AG, PEOPLE V BELL 1969 IR 24

COURTS (SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS) ACT 1961 S14(2)

COURTS (SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS) ACT 1961 S8(2)

COURTS OF JUSTICE ACT 1924 S22

COURTS (SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS) ACT 1961 S27(1)

LANDLORD & TENANT (GROUND RENTS) ACT 1967 S22(1)

FAMILY HOME PROTECTION ACT 1976 S10(2)

FAMILY LAW ACT 1981 S8

CCR O.58

INSPECTOR OF TAXES V ARIDA LTD 1992 2 IR 155

Synopsis:

CIRCUIT COURT

Jurisdiction

Costs - Award - Income tax - Appeal - Rehearing - Taxpayer treated as a party to a proceeding - Statute - Interpretation - Rules of the Circuit Court, 1950, order 58, r. 1 - Income Tax Act, 1967, ss. 428–430 - Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act, 1961, s. 27 - (266/92 - Supreme Court - 31/7/95) - [1995] 2 I.R. 230

|Inspector of Taxes v. Arida Ltd.|

PRACTICE

Costs

Award - Jurisdiction - Circuit Court - Income tax - Appeal - Determination - Appeal from special commissioners - (266/92 - Supreme Court - 31/7/95) - [1995] 2 I.R. 230 - [1996] 1 ILRM 74

|Inspector of Taxes v. Arida Ltd.|

REVENUE

Income tax

Appeal - Costs - Award - Circuit Court - Jurisdiction - Re-hearing of appeal - (266/92 - Supreme Court - 31/7/95) [1995] 2 I.R. 230

|Inspector of Taxes v. Arida Ltd.|

WORDS AND PHRASES

"Proceeding"

Revenue - Commissioners - Assessment - Appeal - Rehearing in Circuit Court - Whether rehearing was a proceeding in the court - (266/92 - Supreme Court - 31/7/95) [1995] 2 I.R. 230 1996 1 ILRM 74

|Inspector of Taxes v. Arida Ltd.|

1 JUDGMENT of Egan, J. delivered the 31st day of July 1995. [NEM DISS]

2 On the 4th day of November 1991 Judge Frank Martin (then a Judge of the Circuit Court) stated a case for the determination of the High Court in the terms following:-

CASE STATED

3 1. This case is stated pursuant to Section 428 of the Income Tax Act, 1967as applied by Section 430 of the said Act by way of Appeal from a determination of the Circuit Court made on the 26th day of February, 1990 for the determination of the question as to whether the Circuit Court Judge hearing an Appeal pursuant to the provision of Section 429 of the Income Tax Act, 1967has jurisdiction to award costs.

4 2. On the 26th day of February, 1990 I heard and determined an Appeal pursuant to Section 429 of the Income Tax Act, 1967, brought by the Respondent herein against the determination of the Appeal Commissioners made the 22nd day of June, 1988 affirming assessments to Corporation Tax for the accounting period ended 30th November, 1984 and 30th November 1985.

5 3. Briefly stated, the principal issue before me was whether the taxpayer company was carrying on trade for a period of years so as to be entitled to claim export sales relief against its profits pursuant to the provisions of Section 58(3) of the Corporation Tax Act, 1976, as modified by Section 42 of the Finance Act, 1980. Having regard to the evidence adduced on behalf of the above named Respondent and the arguments of Counsel for the Respondent and for the Appellant, I determined the said issue in favour of the Respondent having accepted the evidence which had been adduced.

6 4. Counsel for the Respondent taxpayer thereupon applied for an Order awarding to the Respondent the costs of the Appeal before me, and in support of the said Application contended:-

7 (a) That I had power to award costs under the Rules of the Circuit Court, and in particular Order 58 Rule 1 of the Rules of the Circuit Court, 1950, in any proceedings "save as otherwise provided by Statute";

8 (b) No provision of the Income Tax Act provides that the Circuit Court shall not have power to award costs or alternatively, specifically excludes the award of costs by the Circuit Court;

9 (c) A refusal to award costs would be unfairly prejudicial to the Respondent and would or could prevent access to the Courts. Alternatively, a failure to award costs would be unfair and would amount to unequal treatment of the Respondent before the law and/or would be an unjust attack on his private property rights;

10 (d) In the circumstances, the Circuit Court has express jurisdiction, or alternatively, inherent jurisdiction to award costs, which are in the discretion of the Judge.

11 5. Counsel for the Inspector of Taxes contended:

12 (a) The powers of the Circuit Court Judge who is assigned to hear Appeals to the Circuit Court under Section 429 of the Income Tax Act, 1967, are limited by Section 429 (2) to the powers of the Appeal Commissioners pursuant to Part XXVI of the said Income Tax Act, 1967;

13 (b) The Appeal Commissioners have no power to award costs;

14 (c) Section 428 (6) expressly provides that the High Court may make such Order as to costs as to the Court may seem fit;

15 (d) The Circuit Court Rules have no Application to Appeals heard pursuant to Section 429 of the Income Tax Act, 1967. Alternatively, the provisions of the Section 429 (2) and Section 428 (6) when read together in the context of Part XXVI of the Income Tax Act, 1967, amount to a provision "otherwise" for the purposes of Order 58 Rule 1 so a to exclude any power to award costs.

16 6. It was common case between the parties that:

17 (a) The Circuit Court Judge sits without a Registrar and no Order is drawn up. The determination of the Circuit Court Judge is in practice recorded on a form which is handed to him by the Inspector. The relevant Form ASI in respect of the Appeals at issue are attached hereto and form part of this Case Stated;

18 (b) The normal practice for the Circuit Court Judge is not to award costs on Appeals under Section 429 of the Income Tax Act, 1967, though in the recent past there have been a number of cases where I have awarded costs (none of which have come before the High Court for its determination).

19 7. Having regard the contention of both parties, I decided that sitting as a Judge of the Circuit Court I have inherent jurisdiction and power to award costs, or in the alternative, have jurisdiction under the Rules of Court so to do, and in the exercise of my discretion, I awarded costs to the taxpayer against the Inspector of Taxes. Counsel for the Inspector of Taxes expressed dissatisfaction and the Inspector of Taxes duly requested that I state and sign a case for the opinion of the High Court under Section 428, as applied by Section 430 of the Income Tax Act, 1967, which I now...