28 / 346
GAZETTE
JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1983
Revised Income Tax
Appeal Procedures
Mr. J.J. Ivers,
Director General,
The Incorporated Law Society of Ireland.,
25.10.82
Dear Mr. Ivers,
The Chairman has asked me to write and correct an
apparent misunderstanding which has arisen of his
remarks at the discussion on 16 June, 1982, concern-
ing revised procedures being introduced by the
Revenue Commissioners in connection with the con-
sideration of further proceedings by High Court
action following a determination given by the Appeal
Commissioners in favour of a taxpayer. The
Chairman wishes to emphasise that decisions made
by Judges of the Circuit Court on the re-hearing of
tax appeals were specifically excluded by him from
the new operating procedure.
The principle behind the new procedure is that the
Revenue accept the position of the Appeal Commis-
sioners as the arbiters of disputes between the
Revenue and the taxpayer as to the taxpayer's
liability. The Revenue will not, therefore, seek to
have the Appeal Commissioners' decisions upset by
taking an appeal to the High Court (except in special
types of cases, primarily tax avoidence cases). Where,
however,
the taxpayer
refuses to accept the Appeal
Commissioners' decision and seeks to have it upset
by calling for a rehearing by the Circuit Court Judge,
the Revenue reserve the right — in the event of the
Judge giving a decision contrary to that of the Appeal
Commissioners — to take the case to the High Court
with a view to having the decision of the Appeal
Commissioners restored.
Yours sincerely,
S. M. O'Ceallachain,
Oifi^ na gCoimisinéirí Ioncaim,
Caisleán Bhaile Átha Cliath,
Baile Atha Cliath 2.
Mr. J. Ivers,
Director General,
Incorporated Law Society of Ireland.
9.11.82
Dear Mr. Ivers,
I am directed by the Chairman to refer to the
discussion on 16 June, 1982, at which representatives
of your Society were present concerning the
introduction of revised procedures by the Revenue
Commissioners in relation to determinations of
appeals by the Appeal Commissioners.
During the discussion the Chairman undertook to
advise your Society of determinations made by the
Appeal Commissioners and accepted by the Revenue
Commissioners which were of general application. A
promise was also made by the Chairman that
notification of High Court and Supreme Court
judgments would be supplied in advance of the
printing of a tax leaflet.
A summary of the material issues in three cases
where Appeal Commissioners determinations have
been accepted by the Revenue Commissioners is
attached. I am also enclosing a short note on a
Supreme Court judgment handed down on 4
December, 1981, on the question of the scope of a tax
charge orr the profits of a "dealer in cattle".
Yours sincerely,
S.M. O Ceallachain,
Oifig na gCoimisinéirí Ioncaim,
Caisleán Bhaile Atha Claith,
Baile Atha Cliath 2.
Appeal Commissioners' determinations accepted
by the Revenue Commissioners
1. Lump sum payments made by a bank to employees of a
branch where an armed raid had taken place.
The taxpayer, a bank official, received a payment
of £100 from his employer in accordance with a
practice .whereby such payments were made to
officials of a branch who had been involved with
armed raiders. It was claimed on behalf of the
taxpayer that the payments made by the bank in
such cases were voluntary and in the nature of
testimonials on personal grounds to employees
who had suffered distress and that such sums were
not chargeable emoluments for Schedule E
purposes.
The Appeal Commissioners upheld the
taxpayer's contentions.
2. Relief for certain bridging loan interest - Section 32
of the Finance Act, 1974.
The point at issue concerned the amount of
additional interest relief allowable under the
provisions of section 496, Income Tax Act, 1967
(as amended by section 29, Finance Act, 1974) by
virtue of section 32, Finance Act, 1974.
The Appeal Commissioners determination of
the effect of the statutory provisions was as
follows:—
(1) Additional relief is allowable under section 496
of the Income Tax Act, 1967, in accordance
with the provisions of section 32, Finance Act,
1974, up to the appropriate ceiling on relief as
set out in section 496.
(2) Where the period of twelve months in respect
of which the additional relief is due extends
over two income tax years the ceiling figure is
to be apportioned on a time basis over the two
years.
(3) The excess of any interest paid during the
period of twelve months on any loans to which
section 32, Finance Act, 1974 apply over the
relief allowable by virtue of the section is not
available for any further relief under section
496.
(continued on p. 22)
20