| 21/8/2008 |
Bil-Malti
HOME
SERVICES
HELP
SEARCH
|
| Court of Appeal - Decisions in Income Tax Cases |
| Case No: 62 |
Decided on 15 June 1966 |
   |
|
Delivery Of Notices In Terms Of The Income Tax Act.
|
The Income Tax Act requires that notice from the Revenue be either delivered personally, or be sent by registered post to the taxpayer's last known business or private address. In the case in question, the taxpayer was an architect by profession, and a notice of refusal of his objection was sent to him at his professional office. As the postman did not find anybody at the office, the taxpayer was asked to call at the post office where the refusal was consigned to him. The taxpayer filed an appeal to the Board of Special Commissioners one day late, counting from the day when the refusal was consigned to him by the postmaster. He tried to counter the Revenue's plea of nullity by claiming that delivery of the notice of refusal had not been made according to law since, as a professional, he was not carrying on a business and could not, therefore, have a business address.
Both the Board and the Court rejected the taxpayer's contention. 'Business' in this context was not a source of income, but only a description of the place where a person carries on his income-earning activities. In any case, delivery had actually been made personally when the postmaster consigned to him the notice of refusal. It made no difference that the notice of refusal was originally sent by registered post. Neither did it make any difference that it was the postal official who handed the refusal personally, rather than an employee of the Revenue Department. There was no particular requirement in this sense in the Act.
BSC Case No: 6/65
|
|
|
|
|