| 6/1/2009 |
Bil-Malti
HOME
SERVICES
HELP
SEARCH
|
| Court of Appeal - Decisions in Income Tax Cases |
| Case No: 99 |
Decided: 27 June, 1973 |
   |
|
Reprint Of The Income Tax Act. Whether Errors Had Been Made Regarding Certain Amendments So As To Render The Reprint Ultra Vires The "Existing Laws (Reprint) Act". Statements Made In Parliament Do Not Supercede The Text Of The Law
|
This case is basically identical to case 100. Two separate taxpayers had recourse to the Civil Court to challenge a reprint of the Income Tax Act by the Attorney General under the provisions of the "Existing Laws (Reprint) Act", 1963. If the law reprinted under the provisions of this Act was correct, the text would become the official and binding text of the law reprinted, together with all the amendments made thereto over the years.
The issue queried concerned the real meaning of certain amendments made in 1955, particularly the years of assessment affected with retrospective effect. The cases were heard by two different judges: one of whom decided that the law had been reprinted wrongly, while the other essentially decided that the reprint was correct, saving minor issues regarding two years of assessment. Appeals and counter appeals were entered against both judgements.
The Court of Appeal ruled that the reprint had been correctly made, and in so far as declarations made in Parliament were not consistent with the reprint, the reprinted law was the correct text of what Parliament had voted, and it had to take precedence over what was said in Parliament.
(Note: These cases were not appeals from decisions by the Board of Special Commissioners)
|
|
|
|
|