Ambrose J:

This was a summons asking for an order that the plaintiff deliver to the defendant certain particulars of the claim in this action.

The action was brought by the Comptroller of Income Tax to compel payment of income tax in accordance with s. 86 of the Income Tax Ordinance, one month having passed after service of notice of assessment.

It is to be noted that s. 86 of the principal Ordinance was amended by s. 11 of the Income Tax (Amendment) Ordinance, 1960, and this amendment came into operation on 1 January 1960. Section 86 as amended reads as follows:

Subject to the provisions of s. 91 of this Ordinance, tax for any year of assessment levied in accordance with the provisions of s. 42 or 43 of this Ordinance shall, notwithstanding any objection or appeal against the assessment on which such tax is levied payable at the place stated in the notice given under s. 76 of this Ordinance within one month after the service of such notice.

It is also to be noted that s. 85 of the principal Ordinance was repealed by s. 10 of the amending Ordinance with effect from the same date. Section 85 reads as follows:

Collection of tax shall, in cases where notice of an objection or an appeal has been given, remain in abeyance until such objection or appeal is determined: Provided that the Comptroller may in any such case enforce payment of that portion of the tax, if any, which is not in dispute.

The statement of claim set out four claims totalling $333,555 for the years of assessment 1950, 1951, 1952 and 1953. By an order of Court dated 21 July 1961, leave was granted to the plaintiff to amend the statement of claim. As the amended claims are similar, it is sufficient to set out one of them. The amended claim for the year of assessment 1953 reads as follows:

4. Year of assessment 1953.

To income tax for the year of Assessment 1953 as per Assessment of the Comptroller of Income Tax dated 15 December 1959, and Demand Note dated 31 October 1960, $141,185.

The plaintiff withdrew the claim of $30,000 for the year of assessment 1950 on 10 August 1961.

The first question I considered was whether the plaintiff had failed to state any material facts in the amended statement of claim, that is, any facts necessary for the purpose of formulating a complete cause of action under s. 86 of the principal Ordinance. It seemed to me, at first sight, that one material fact was not stated in respect of each of the claims, namely, that one month had passed since the service of the notice of assessment. But I observed that the amended statement of claim ends with the words:

Total Balance due under s. 86 of the Income Tax Ordinance (Cap. 166), $333,555.

And I took the view that these words amounted to a statement that one month had passed since the service of the notice of the assessment in respect of each of the claims.

The next question I considered was whether I should order the plaintiff to furnish particulars in respect of this material fact as regards each claim. The function of particulars is to fill in the picture of the plaintiff's cause of action with information sufficiently detailed to put the defendant on his guard as to the case he has to meet. In my opinion, the dates of the notices of assessment referred to in the statement of claim and the dates of service were within the defendant's knowledge. It is to be observed that in his affidavit filed in support of his application for particulars the defendant did not state that he had not been served with the notices of assessment. It did not seem to me that any particulars as to the notices of assessment were necessary to put the defendant on his guard as to the case he had to meet.

Apart from the dates of the notices of assessment and the dates of service, the defendant sought particulars of the following matters,:

(1)the amount of income chargeable under s. 42 or 43 of the Ordinance;

(2)the sources of the assessable income charged with tax and their nature;

(3)the rates