§ Sir P. PILDITCHasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he would be prepared to meet to some extent the grave objections to the assessments which have been made for Income Tax, Schedule A, purposes in districts outside London by representatives of the Inland Revenue Department, by permitting an appeal to the assessment committees of the unions who are likely to be better apprised of local circumstances and rental values, so bringing these proceedings into closer accord with those usual in London?
§ Major BOYD-CARPENTERNo, Sir. In those cases in which a personal hearing on appeal is necessary—and I do not anticipate that the number of these cases will be much larger than in former re-assessment years—I have no doubt that the local Commissioners of Income Tax will deal most competently with the matters committed to them.
§ Mr. PENNYasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will make provision for the State to refund the 2397W expenses incurred when an appeal is made against assessment and the decision is given in favour of the appellant?
§ Major BOYD-CARPENTERThe law makes no provision regarding costs in proceedings before the local or Special Commissioners of Income Tax and I see no reason to disturb the present position under which the Crown neither receives nor pays costs in these cases. In proceedings in the Courts, the Courts themselves make any proper order as to payment of costs. The same course is prescribed in Estate Duty appeals heard by a referee.
§ Mr. PENNYasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the feeling prevailing in the country that many parts of the London area are under-assessed and that by continuing under the quinquennial system until 1925 they will be receiving preferential treatment, he will take steps to bring about uniformity and allay the existing sense of injustice?
§ Major BOYD-CARPENTERI would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which was given on this subject to the hon. Member for Finchley (Colonel Newman) on the 20th March. I am sending my hon. Friend a copy of that reply.
§ Mr. W. GRAHAMasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in the present controversy regarding re-valuation, his attention has been called to the fact that in Scotland the Exchequer has had the benefit of an annual valuation, and that for this reason the Scottish people have paid substantially more in proportion in Income Tax within recent years owing to the valuation being kept up to date; and whether, in any inquiry into English conditions, the Scottish position will be taken into account?
§ Major BOYD - CARPENTERI am aware that up to 1919–20 the annual valuation, to which the hon. Member refers, formed the basis of the Income Tax, Schedule A assessment, and I agree that this would be a material fact in any comparison between conditions in the two countries.
§ Sir F. SANDERSONasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that notices of assessment of annual value of property for the year ended 5th April, 2398W 1923, for purposes of assessment of Income Tax and Inhabited House Duty for the year ending 1923–24, have been made at increases in some cases of over 100 per cent. without any intimation having been given to the owner or tenant; that this is causing serious discontent and hardship; and whether he will consider waiving the whole matter for 12 months until the facts of the case, as between tenant, owner, and the assessor of Income Tax, have been considered?
§ Major BOYD-CARPENTERI would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which was given yesterday on this subject to the hon. Member for Richmond (Mr. Becker), and I am sending him a copy of that reply. With regard to the absence of notice, to which my hon. Friend alludes, I should add that the issue of notices of re-assessment is not yet completed. Where in an exceptional case rent has increased over 100 per cent., it is proper that the assessment should be correspondingly raised in order that the landlord may be charged to income Tax on his actual income.
§ Mr. A. T. DAVIESasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has considered the short period allowed for appeals in the case of re-assessments under Schedule A (Income Tax); and whether, in view of the complaints made, the time can be extended to give all who have the right of appeal better opportunity to do so than is now provided?
§ Major BOYD-CARPENTERAs has already been stated in reply to other hon. Members, the Inland Revenue Authorities do not propose, unless in any case there is some special reason to the contrary, to object to an appeal against an assessment of annual value on the ground that notice was not given within the time limited therefor.
§ Major BIRCHALLasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will issue instructions so as to secure that the description of the property on the notice of assessment forms for the new valuation shall be sufficiently full as to render identification easy?
§ Major BOYD-CARPENTEREvery effort has been made to secure that the notice of assessment shall sufficiently identify the property concerned, and I was not aware that any difficulty had 2399W arisen in this respect. If, however, my hon. Friend has any particular case in mind, and cares to send me particulars, I will have the matter looked into.
§ Major BIRCHALLasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will issue instructions that a copy of the notice of assessment under the new valuation shall be sent to the owner as well as the occupier of the premises concerned?
§ Major BOYD-CARPENTERThe notice of assessment is in conformity with law served upon the person assessed who is normally the occupier, but in certain cases, especially the cases of weekly properties and flats, the owner. Apart from such individual notices, the law provides for a general notice which is affixed in a public place in each parish and for inspection of the assessment by the person interested. The owner of property equally with the tenant has a right of appeal against an assessment. It would, I fear, be impracticable to issue a particular notice of assessment to every owner, but where through absence of such a notice an owner is prevented from appealing at the proper time, the Inland Revenue authorities have no intention of objecting to an appeal on the ground that notice was delayed.
§ Mr. C. WHITEasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware of the indignation in the country at the manner in which property has been re-assessed; whether a separate valuation, as required by law, has been made in each case; whether he took into consideration in framing his Budget the large amount this would bring into the Exchequer; and whether, as a grave legal question has arisen as to whether the action taken by the Commissioners can be justified, he will give instructions to suspend the whole matter till a decision has been taken in the Courts?
§ Major BOYD-CARPENTERI think that the hon. Member is inclined to exaggerate the public feeling in this matter. I do not know to what grave legal question he refers, nor am I aware of any reason for suspending the re-assessment which has been carried out in the same manner as previous re-assessments over a long period of years. Account has been taken of the re-assessment in framing the Budget Estimates for the current year.
2400W
§ Mr. COLLISONasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the object of the assessment under Schedule A of the Income Tax is to secure Income Tax in respect of income from property on the basis of the income actually derived from the property or on the basis of the annual value of such property?
§ Major BOYD-CARPENTERI would refer the hon. Member to the replies which were given on this subject on the 3rd May to the hon. Members for East Surrey (Mr. Galbraith) and Guildford (Sir H. Buckingham). I am sending the hon. Member a copy of those replies.