A corporation tax form submitted on behalf of Michael Lowry’s business “didn’t amount to a hill of beans” because it was unsigned, a jury has heard.
The trial has been hearing from Revenue officers in relation to the accused’s tax returns for both himself and his company.
Dublin Circuit Criminal Court heard that an income tax return for the year ending 2002 was submitted on behalf of Mr Lowry in October 2003 using Revenue Online Service (ROS). It indicated that the accused had a total income of €151,050, including a public office salary of €69,515 but as he had already paid PAYE for that year, he had no tax liability and had in fact overpaid his tax by €136.
A corporation tax (CT1) form submitted on behalf of his company Garuda Ltd, concluded that it operated at a loss of almost €100,000 for the year ending December 31st 2002 and as such had no tax liability. This form also stated that the company was due a refund of €3,500.
A CT1 form submitted in August 2007 for the year ending 2006 stated that Garuda Ltd had an income of just over €915,000 and a tax liability of €114,000.
Thomas Keating, a retired inspector of taxes who was stationed in Thurles from January 2006 to October 2014 agreed with Patrick Treacy SC, defending Garuda Ltd, that the declaration on the CT1 form received on behalf of Garuda for the year ending 2002, was neither signed nor dated.
Unsigned
He agreed that it should not have been acted upon as it was not signed.
He accepted that the declaration states that the person signing the document agreed that everything in the form, to the best of their knowledge, was correct and complete.
“There is no statement made in that document (CT1 form) that any of these boxes are correct and complete because the declaration is unsigned,” Mr Treacy said.
“It doesn’t amount to a hill of beans if the form is not signed,” he continued after he quipped that there was “a lot of beans mentioned” by prosecuting counsel Remy Farrell in his opening address to the jury on Monday.
Again referring to Mr Farrell’s opening statement, Mr Treacy asked the witness if he had heard the quotes from Monday’s hearing “putting the toothpaste back into the tube” or “cooking the books not once but twice”.
“I wasn’t in court but I heard it on RTÉ news,” Mr Keating replied.
“But when the form is not even signed the lid isn’t even taken off the tube . . . the books weren’t even cooked,” Mr Treacy submitted.
Mr Keating accepted again that the form was processed without the signature but added that Garuda Ltd received a rebate because of the CT1 form being accepted.
Mr Keating agreed with Michael O’Higgins SC, defending Mr Lowry, that his client’s tax agent, BBT Accountants, received a letter from Revenue on August 26th, 2013, concerning the sum of money “that is the core issue of this case”.
He accepted that the letter stated that Revenue considered the sum of Stg £248,624, received in 2002, constituted income for tax purposes. It outlined that he now owed income tax on that, along with levies, penalties and fines, totalling €516,000.
Mr Keating further accepted that a similar letter was issued to Garuda Ltd, as Revenue determined that the company owed PAYE and PRSI on the sum. This letter stated that the company owed just over €510,000, which again included the original tax, penalties and fines.
The witness agreed that Mr Lowry and Garuda had a right to reply and successfully challenged Revenue’s findings with the Appeals Commission. The commission assessed Mr Lowry’s and Garuda’s tax liability at zero.
Not guilty plea
Mr Lowry (64) of Glenreigh, Holycross, Co. Tipperary, earlier pleaded not guilty at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court to four charges of filing incorrect tax returns on dates between August 2002 and August 2007 in relation to a sum of Stg £248,624 received by his company, Garuda Ltd, and one charge in relation to failing to keep a proper set of accounts on dates between August 28th, 2002 and August 3rd, 2007.
He further pleaded not guilty on behalf of Garuda Ltd to three similar charges in relation to the company’s tax affairs and one charge of failing to keep a proper set of accounts on the same dates.
It is the State’s case that Mr Lowry’s company received Stg £248,624 in commission from Norpe OY, a refrigeration company based in Finland, in August 2002.
It is alleged that Mr Lowry arranged for this payment to be made to a third party, residing in the Isle of Man, and therefore it didn’t appear in the company accounts for that year, nor did he declare it as income.
It is further alleged that the accounts were then falsified in 2007 to reflect that the payment was received in 2006.
“It was the accountant’s version of refried beans. The books are cooked in 2002, a sum of money is kept off the books and in 2007, the 2006 books are cooked again to bring the money in without drawing attention to it,” Mr Farrell told the jury in his opening address.
Mr Farrell told the jury that it is the State’s case that a sum of Stg £248,624 received by Mr Lowry’s company and not declared to Revenue, “would have amounted to 88 per cent of the company’s certified gross profits for the year”.
The trial continues before Judge Martin Nolan and a jury.