MCGOVERN V. WALTER CAVILL PTY. LIMITED AND ANOTHER

Net ow CLO Wot

\

WALTER. CAVILL PTY. LIMITED. AND. ANOTHER

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

W. M, Houstox, Govt.

4978/35

PATRICK SILVESTA McGOVERN

Ve

WALTER CAVILL PTY, LIMITED AND ANOR.

JUDGMENT McTIERNAN J.

McGOVERN Ve

WALTER CAVILL PTY. LIMITED AND ANOTHER

ORDER

This case was in the list last Friday and I then announced my decision. Mr. Holmes for the plaintiff asked me to defer pronouncing judgment until to-day. I acceded to that application. I now order that judgment be entered in accordance with my decision. The judgment is that each defendant is guilty of the offences alleged under s. 231 and that each defendant showld pay to the plaintiff a penalty of £250 for each

offence and the costs of this action.

PATRICK SILVESTA McGOVERN

ve

WALTER CAVILL PTY. LIMITED AND ANOR.

In these proceedings, which are taxation prosecutions, pecuniary penalties are claimed against both defendants. The prosecutions are concerned with the years of income ending 30th June 1950 and that ending 30th June 1951. The assessment of tax in respect of the former year was governed by the Income Tax and Social Services Con- tribution Assessment Act 1936-1950 and in respect of the second year by the Income Tax and Social Services Contribution Assessment Act 1936-1951. Part VII of both of those Acts contains penal provisions and the procedure for the recovery by the Crown of a pecuniary penalty under the Act. The provisions of these Acts which are now material are the same. The charges against the defendant company are made underss. 231 and 227 respectively. The charges against the other defendant are concerned with the commission by the company of those offences and are founded on s. 5 of the Commonwealth Crimes Act 1914-1950, The Commissioner of Taxation is authorised under s. 233 of the Income Tax and Social Services Contribution Assessment Act to institute the taxation prosecution under Part VII. He avers all the allegations contained in the statement of claim pursuant to s. 243. The returns of the defendant company for each relevant year and the notices of assessment issued to it were put in evidence. The Commissioner relied upon the averments in the statement of claim as amended, the returns and the notices of assessment to prove the charges made against each defendant. The only witness called on behalf of the defendants was E. C. Bingham, who was a director