The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1904-11-11
COURT
GIVES ANSWER


a number Of decisions were handed
down yesterday by the Tax Appeal
Court r r. Lansing j. r. Gait. and
j. r. Brown Assessor Holt is sus-
tanned i'm most Of the cases either
wholly or In part though he loses one
income tax case. Following is SUM
mary of the decisions:
Eliza $. Wilder. Returned at $22, 900
Assessed at $4,000 c. w. Ashford for
appellant.
Discriminating into consideration
all of the evidence, also the returns
from adjoining and adjacent property
owners and the sales of property i'm the
vicinity during 1903. the court fixes the
assessment on said land at 100000"
J. G. Faria. A. G. Correa for appel
liant.
1. Land ON King street. Returned
at $500. Assessed at $500. Assessor
sustained
?. Lessee's interest i'm land on
Punchbowl street. Returned at $780,
Assessed at $4,000. Court fixes assess
ment at $500.
g. Lessee's interest i'm improvements
on No. g Returned at $500. Assessed
at $140O. Court fixes assessment on
cottages i'm question at $500.
4. Lessee's interest in improvements
in property on Kinau street. Return
ed at $780, Assessed at $3.50. Court
! fixes the assessment at 1876
5. Lessee's interest in land on Bere-
! Ffrr, rFv u
| sessed at $4,000. Court fixes assessment
at $4,000.
| 6. Lessee's interest i'm improvements
on No. 5. Returned at $250O. Assess
ed at S5OOO Court confirms the asses
sors figure
Z. Lessees interest in land, Bereta-
MIA street, rear. Returned at $50 AS
sessed at $780, Court sustains asses
sor.
s. Lessees interest in improvements
on No. 7. Returned at 5000. Assessed
at $1,000. Court sustains assessor.
9. Lessee's interest in improvements
on Beretania street, rear. Returned
at $500. Assessed at $1,000. Court sus-
tains appellant in his return of 5000
fixing the assessment at that amount.
T. A. Hays, income tax appeal. D.
L. Wilmington for appellant. Appel
liant returns net income 1895. Assess.
ment of net income S2,S95.
THE income tax laws provide speci.
fically in section No. 6, second para.
graph, for the manner in which tn,
assessor shall proceed where any per
son renders a return which, in the
opinion of the assessor, is false anC
fraudulent or contains any under
statement.
Again, i'm section of the income Ia,
laws, there is a provision for the penal
ty of false or fraudulent returns for
valuation.
THE court is of the opinion that tn
assessor has not made his assessmen
in this case in accordance with tn
provision of the law. The court, there
fore sustains the appellant i'm his re
turn"
The Gregg Co. Limited, Income ia,
appeal c. NJ. Lovsted for appellant.
THE amount involved is $6493 II
which the appellant claims by a deduc
tion in the returns of the appellant un
der schedule b for actual losses in
CURED in trade by the home Office a
Newburg, New York.
The court sustains the assessor il
not allowing deduction for losses in
CURED outside of the Territory of Ha
wall, and fixes the net income tn
same as that made by the assessor
namely, $4O51 80
c. H. Smith. Income tax appea
Appellant in person.
THE amount in dispute is $44S. 81
, claimed by the appellant as deduC
ton for necessary expenses incurred 1
( carrying on his business. The assesso
, does net allow said deduction, claimin
that the amount involved is i'm tn
nature of an investment.
The court believes that the instru
ments, books, etc. in the case of thi
q appellant, who is civil engineer, ar
clearly necessary for him to have /
the carrying on of his work and tina
the purchases of same are necessar
expenses for the conducting of hi
business. The court therefore, sus
tains the appellant and rules that tn
deduction of $44S so be allowed"
Robertson & Wilder represented tn
tn, al