| 21/8/2008 |
Bil-Malti
HOME
SERVICES
HELP
SEARCH
|
| Board of Special Commissioners - Cases |
| Case No. 3/52 |
Decided: 28 May, 1953 |
   |
|
Taxability of judges' salary - article 8(1), now 12(1) Income Tax Act; when an expense is not deductible as it is an application of the income - article 11(c), now 26 Income Tax Act; taxability of laudemium - article 5(1)(f), now 4(1)(e), Income Tax Act
|
The points at issue were mainly three:
- appellant claimed that taxing his judge's salary was anti-Constitutional. The Board held that the Act did not contemplate any exemption on judges' salaries. The protection given by the Constitution to judges' salaries was intended to ensure their independence and not to accord them privileges over other citizens.
- appellant was a legatee and was obliged to make certain payments (masses etc,) out of the income derived from the legacy; he claimed that such expenses were to be deducted. The Board rejected this claim as such payments were not a deductible expense but an application of the income. The payment was of a capital nature in respect of which a deduction was specifically prohibited under article 11(c).
- appellant also claimed that sums received as laudemia were not taxable as these were of an incidental nature, non-recurring and not representing the profits from the relative assets. The Board held that a laudemium was a gain derived from property and taxable under article 5(1)(f) which taxes "rents, royalties, premiums and any other profits arising from property". The non-recurrence of a payment did not mean that such payment did not constitute taxable income.
|
|
|
|
|