asked the Minister for Finance whether the Revenue Commissioners prior to a date in 1960 issued to a person (particulars supplied) any notice demanding payment by him of the second instalment of income tax for the year 1955-56 which was claimed by the Collector of Taxes to be due by him; and, if so, when such notice or notices were issued; and, if not, why.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Income Tax Payment: Issue of Demand Notice.
13.
Mr. Ryan
Prior to the year 1960, demands were issued on 19th June, 1956, and 25th July, 1956, to the person in question for payment of the second instalment of Schedule E income tax due by him in respect of the year 1955/56.
Mr. Ryan
Will the Minister say whether he considers it fair or proper procedure for the Revenue Commissioners not to issue any reminder notice in respect of an arrear of tax for a period of four years? Is the Minister aware that in demands for tax in subsequent years there was no mention of the demand of any arrears due? Is the Minister further aware that the person referred to was working at the time he was assessed for £33 15s. 0d. for the second instalment of 1956 and has since become a pensioner? Is the Minister further aware that the person concerned was completely satisfied in his own mind that he paid the income tax instalment referred to in cash in July, 1956, and he is therefore at a loss to understand why, four years later, he was sent a demand for payment of the second instalment of 1956?
It would be much more satisfactory if the Deputy put down that whole series of supplementaries on the Order Paper for answer by the Minister for Finance. In respect of the last supplementary put by the Deputy—as to whether this person was convinced he had paid certain sums in cash—I would ask the Deputy to consider what that implies. It implies that an officer of the Revenue Commissioners did not account for the cash handed to him. I suggest that innuendo should not be conveyed by way of supplementary.
Mr. Ryan
Is the Minister aware that the person referred to said what the Minister takes exception to in my supplementary, or said as much, in a letter to the Revevnue Commissioners on the 16th March and that he said it in person in the offices of the Revenue Commissioners on the 31st March?
He may have said it in a letter and he may have said it in the offices but he certainly did not publish the fact as the Deputy has.
Mr. Ryan
Is the Minister taking exception to the fact that a Deputy wants to ventilate a grievance of a citizen of this country?
No, I am not. I am suggesting to the Deputy that in relation to some of the questions he puts in this House he ought to act with a greater sense of responsibility.
Mr. Ryan
I take the strongest exception to the Minister's remark. I will not be intimidated by any effort on his part to silence me or to deny my right to speak for the humblest citizen of this State.
Will the Minister take a lesson in discretion himself?