(1988)1988November19 [A.LOIZOU,P.) INTHE MATTER OFARTICLE 146OFTHE CONSTITUTION ANDREAS CHR.POULLIS, Applicant, v. THEREPUBLICOFCYPRUS,THROUGH 1.THECOMISSIONEROFINCOMETAX, 2.THEATTORNEY-GENERAL, Respondents. (CaseNo. 260/84). Taxation—Income Tax—Assessmentof—JudicialControl—Principlesapplicable. InthiscasetheCourtfoundthatthesubjudiceassessmentswereneither excessivenorarbitrary,astheapplicanthadfailedtosubstantiatehisfactual allegations.TheCourtfurther foundthattheywerereasonablyopentothe 5 respondent.Consequentlytherecoursewasdismissed. Recoursedismissed. Noorderastocosts. Casesreferredto: 10 Coussoumidesv. TheRepublic
(1966)3C.L.R.1; Georghiades v.TheRepublic
(1982)3C.L.R.
- 2176 Poullis v. Republic 3 C.L.R. Recourse. ' Recourse against theincometax assessment raised on appli cant. M.Vassiliou, for theapplicant. 5 Y.Lazarou, for therespondents. Cur. adv. vult. * A. LOIZOUP.read thefollowingjudgment. By thepresent recoursetheapplicantseeks"adeclaration of theCourtthatthe in μ; come tax assessment again?* πι and/or the assessment of his taxable incomeby therespondentCommissioneris nullandvoid andof nolegaleffect whatsoever." The applicant,atall material times,derived his income from theimportandsaleof drugs. ^ Following theapplicant's objections against the assessements for theyears 1975 and 1981 therespondent Commissioner de manded from him a statement of assets and liabilities as at the 31st December 1981,which theapplicantsubmitted on the25th August
- After examining suchstatementandhaving interviewed the ap plicant, therespondent Commissioner on the 17th March 1983, andlateronthe30thAugust 1983,requested from himadditional information and particulars as regards, money and property claimed tobelong tohiswife. On thebasisof theinformation andparticulars submitted by theapplicant as well as information in his handstherespondent Commissioner computed the applicant's income, for theperiod from the9thApril 1973,thedateof theprevious statementof as sets andliabilities, tothe31st December 1981,atthe total amount of £32,317.-. Furtherdiscussions wereheld between therespon2177 A. Loizou P. Poullis v. Republic
(1988)dent Commissioner and the applicant during which therespondentCommissionerproposedtoreducetheincomesofound from £32,317 to£29,000.-for the sakeof a settlement but theapplicantdidnotacceptsuchoffer andmadeacounter-offer ofatotal income for the said period of only £16,000. The respondent 5 Commissioner thenproceeded with thedetermination of theassessments underrecourseonthebasisof thecomputation ofthe totalincomeat£32,317andcommunicatedhisdulyreasoneddecisionbyletterofthe31stDecember1983. After several discussions with the applicant, the respondent JQ Commissioner reduced the assessableincomefor theperiodunder review to£24,600 andproceeded with thedischarge of the existing assessmentsdetermined onthe31stDecember 1983and issuednewassessments,after acceptingtheapplicant'sclaimon a number of items.Therespondent Commissioner communicated ,c his new decision to the applicant by his letter dated the 12th March, 1984,inwhichitwasstatedinteralia,asfollows: "...on thebasisofthefacts andinformation youhavegiven,Ihavedecided. (a)toacceptyourstatementasregardstheassetsandliabili- 20 tiesasatthe31stDecember 1981. (
- b)Your allegation that the furniture of your home were paidfor byyourwifeeventhoughitisnotsubstantiated byanyevidence,hasbeenaccepted. (c)Asregards yourallegationthatyoureceivedfromyour 25 wedding£3000incash,thoughyoudidnotsubstantiate it by any evidence, I have accepted the amount of £1500. (
- d)Inoneof yourtripsabroad, you wereaccompaniedby yourwife. Theamountof£500wasconsidered torep- 30 resentexpensesforpersonalreasons. 2178 3 C.L.R. Poullis v. Republic A. Loizou P. 1 5 ** (e)You failed topresent anymaterial establishing that your > wife was working in your company. Having in mind *' '·that duringthe years 1975-1981 you had small children and your wife was burdened with their care, I believe that she could offer only minimal services which she -may havepossiblyOffered, Ihave accepted the amount ·' - - ' 'of £2317." *' Asagainst thisdecision theapplicant filed thepresent recourse bywhich heclaims that thesubjudicedecision is unjustified and IQ unreasonable in thatinraising theassessments inquestion therespondent Commissioner failed toacceptthestatementsof theapplicant asregardshistrue income, his wife's property, hercontribution tohiscompany and histrueexpenses. 15 20 25 Itwascontended on behalf of therespondent that theapplicant failed todischarge the burden which was upon him to establish that theCourt should interfere with the subjudice decision. (See Coussoumides v.The Republic
(1966)3 C.L.R. 1; Georghiades v.TheRepublic
(1982)3C.L.R. 659).On the facts as they were before therespondent Commission, Ifind that the subjudice assessments were neither arbitrary nor excessive as the applicant failed to substantiate his allegations as to theextent of financial assistance he allegedly received from his father-in-law, as to his wife'scontribution towards thefamily expensesandthe remuneration which sheallegedly received for her services tohiscompany of which there is a record of only £315, for the years 1974 and 1975, having been paid to her. I also find that, having in mind thefact that his wedding took place in December 1974,in the absenceof any evidence whatsoever, an allowance of £1500 asweddinggifts incash wasareasonable amount to allow. Finally I find that it was reasonably open to the respondent Commissioner totreat theamountsestimated asrepresenting personalexpenses of himself and hiswife whilst abroad, were soincurred andnot for thepurpose of hisbusiness. Inconclusion Ifind thatinthecircumstances thesubjudicede2179 A.LoizouP. Poullisv. Republic
(1988)cision wasnotarbitrary,butwasreasonably opentotherespondent Commissioner sotodecideandcorrectin law,therespondentCommissioner havingexercised hisdiscretionproperlyand inaccordancewiththeLaw. Foralltheabovereasonstherecoursefails andisherebydis- 5 missed.Inthecircumstances,however,therewillbenoorderas tocosts. Recoursedismissed. Noorderastocosts. 2180