If the accretion of capital was due to an expansion of the old business the tax payable for the years 1951-53 would have been based on his income for the years 1950-52, respectively if due to the ommencement of a new business the provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b) of section 18 (3) of the Ordinance apply, the tax payable in the year 1951-52 would be based on his income for that year, and the tax payable in 1952-53.would be based on the amount of income of one year from the date of the commencement of the new trade or business that is to say, in this case, the tax payable in the years 1951-53 would be based on the income earned from the 1st April, 1951 to the 31st March, 1952. In other words, the appellant's income over the period was taken to be the amount by which his total worth at the end of the period exceeded his total. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, and for convenience of applying the provisions of the Income Tax Ordinance, the date of commencement of these new operations was taken as the 1st April, 1951” and he makes it clear that the assessments were not based on a percentage of turnover or capital, but on a proportion of what he estimated to be the increase in total worth of the appellant between the 1st April, 1951 and the 31st March, 1953. In his replies to the grounds of appeal, filed in the Court below, the Commissioner states that he made the re-assessments for the years 1951-53, because he “came to be of the opinion in October, 1953, that the appellant had come into possession of substantial capital assets, which could not possibly have derived from the kind of trading operations disclosed by the appellant as having existed up to 31st March, 1951”, and he goes on to say: “It became necessary to assume that the appellant had entered into gainful operations of a new or different kind after 31st March, 1951.

The appeals before the learned Chief Justice resulted in his reducing the assessments for the three years in question to £8,650, for each year, and it is against that revision that the appellant made his further appeal to this Court. The appellant’s income was originally assessed at £1,000 and £1,500 for the years 1951-53, respectively, and he paid the tax thereon, but in consequence of information received during the year 1953, the Commissioner, acting under the powers conferred by section 52 (1) of the Income Tax Ordinance, re-assessed the appellant's income at £10,500 for each of these years and made similar assessment of his income for the year of assessment 1953-54. This is an appeal from a decision of Smith, C.J., given in three appeals against assessments of income tax made upon the appellant in respect of the years 1951-52, 1952-54. FOSTER-SUTTON, P., COUSSEY, J.A., AND LUKE, J.įoster-Sutton, P.

Lost judgment mori