Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 23 Apr 1926

Vol. 15 No. 4

CEISTEANNA—QUESTIONS. ORAL ANSWERS. - NEWCASTLE-WEST INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT.

asked the Minister for Finance whether he is aware that Mrs. McEnery, Maiden Street, Newcastle-West, has been assessed by Income Tax Assessor for an amount of income tax which is stated to be excessive, and in respect to which she appealed to the Circuit Judge; that immediately before the Court, Mrs. McEnery became ill and was unable to appear before the Circuit Judge, which she afterwards stated to the Inspector, and requested another day for hearing and was refused, and that now a distraint warrant hangs over Mrs. McEnery which she is unable to meet, and whether, in view of these circumstances, the Minister will recommend the granting of her request for another hearing.

It has been necessary for me to state on more than one occasion that owing to the provisions as to secrecy in the Income Tax Acts cases of individual taxpayers are not suitable for discussion by way of question and answer in the Dáil. I may say, however, that Mrs. McEnery's case was listed for re-hearing before the Circuit Court Judge in Limerick, at 11 o'clock on 26th January, 1926, and that when the case was called the appellant did not appear. The Judge decided to wait until 12 o'clock noon so as to afford Mrs. McEnery an opportunity of putting in an appearance. Mrs. McEnery, however, did not appear and sent no message that would explain her absence. In the circumstances the Judge confirmed the assessments as reduced by the Special Commissioners. The matter having thus been disposed of there is no provision for any further hearing.

Is the Minister aware that a similar question was put down by another Deputy and that he consented to have the case re-opened?

I do not remember what my answer was. In any case the position now is that the assessment having been confirmed as reduced by the Special Commissioners and having been confirmed by the Judge, there is nothing to be done and no way of reopening it.

In a case where the distraint could not be recovered would the Minister consent to re-open it?

That is impossible. It is a debt due to the State and must be recovered.

Top
Share