A Dublin businessman who had to make a €9.9 million tax settlement has been sentenced to three months for tax evasion.

However, Leslie Reynolds (71) of Offington Lawn, Sutton, Co Dublin, is not to begin his sentence until tomorrow to allow him to consider appealing the sentence.

Judge Desmond Hogan also fined Reynolds' company €15,000. Leslie Reynolds & Co, Ltd, East Wall Road, Dublin is involved in the the sale and distribution of engineering components.

Reynolds and his company had earlier pleaded guilty to a range of tax offences involving the filing of incorrect information to the Revenue.

Judge Hogan said the case was the culmination of a long and complicated investigation by the Revenue.

Complications had arisen because records had been shredded and others hidden from the Revenue. However, the judge said the Revenue accepted that the shredding of documents had not been intended.

The totality of the tax evasion involved was "not inconsiderable", he said. It involved two forms.

One was hiding of sales to certain customers which were not recorded in the company's books. These were customers who had infrequent business with the company. The money was not lodged with the company's account with the Bank of Ireland but with Ulster Bank on O'Connell Street, Dublin, or AIB in Finglas.

The second form of the evasion involved the posting of incorrect invoices in the company records. This led to incorrect VAT returns being made.

Judge Hogan said the company was a separate entity with its own responsibilities and had pleaded guilty by resolution. However, from the evidence it appeared the company and Reynolds were "greatly intertwined" and it appeared to him that the company was "an extension of Reynolds's personality and methodology".

The judge said Reynolds was 71 years old and still actively engaged in the running of his company - to a greater extent than his co-directors, his wife and his son.

The company employed 31 people and had a sister company in Northern Ireland.

"He is, I'm told, indispensable to the running of his business" said the judge.

An executive director had been employed to ensure there was no repeat of the offences.

Judge Hogan said the court had considered previous rulings that had been brought to its attention, including the DPP vs George Redmond, Court of Criminal Appeal, 2001.

It further had considered the period over which the offences had occurred, and the loss to the Revenue had the offences not been detected. Judge Hogan cited a number of mitigating factors, including Mr Reynolds' age and importance to his company, and the fact that Mr Reynolds had paid significant penalties to the Revenue.

However, the penalties imposed were proportionate with the amount of tax that had been evaded.

Reynolds had co-operated with the Revenue from an early stage, and had pleaded guilty. "He did save the State from a long and complicated and expensive trial."

However, even taking these mitigating factors into account, a custodial sentence was warranted, Judge Hogan said. The offences had been ones of commission rather than omission. If it was not for the defendant's age and personal circumstances, the sentence would have been greater.