Monthly Archives: February 2017

*Kocharyan v FCT – Taxpayer appeals to Full Federal Court against decision denying deductions for his investment in a forestry (Ludekins) scheme [23]

The taxpayer has appealed to the Full Federal Court against the decision in Kocharyan v FCT [2015] FCA 13. The Federal Court rejected the taxpayer’s appeal against an earlier AAT decision concerning amended assessments. Originally, the AAT (in Re Confidential and FCT [2014] AATA 32) affirmed objection decisions made by the Commissioner to deny the…

DCT v Vasiliades & Ors – taxpayers appeal ‘freezing orders’ obtained by FCT in seeking to collect $33m in tax debts [22]

The taxpayers have appealed to the Full Federal Court against the decision in DCT v Vasiliades & Ors [2014] FCA 1250. In the decision, the Federal Court granted a Deputy Commissioner’s application for freezing orders against several related taxpayers in respect of whom the Commissioner had issued amended assessments totalling almost $33m in tax debts. [LTN…

Upson and FCT – taxpayer appeals default assessments [21]

The taxpayers have appealed to the Federal Court against the decision in Re Upson and FCT [2014] AATA 896. In that case, the AAT upheld default assessments against husband and wife taxpayers. In 2008, the Commissioner commenced an investigation into the affairs of the taxpayers which resulted in him issuing s 167 default assessments of the…

*Seven Network Limited v FCT – Commissioner appeals decision that payment for Winter Olympics television feed was not a ‘royalty’ [20]

The Commissioner has appealed to the Full Federal Court against the decision in Seven Network Limited v FCT [2014] FCA 1411. In that case, the Federal Court allowed the taxpayer’s appeal and held that payments it made to the IOC for broadcasting rights to the Olympic Games were not royalties under the Australia-Switzerland DTA, and…

*Hua Wang Bank Berhad & Ors v FCT – taxpayers appeal Court’s decision that they were resident and taxable on sale of ASX listed shares [19]

The taxpayers have appealed to the Full Federal Court against the decision in Hua Wang Bank Berhad & Ors v FCT [2014] FCA 1392. In that case, the Federal Court found the 5 companies were resident of Australia and liable to pay tax here on the proceeds of the sale of shares in ASX listed…

*Re Wu and FCT – Australian resident Chinese citizen discloses only Australian, not foreign, business income – appeal succeeds on 1 issue [18]

A taxpayer has been partially successful before the AAT in arguing that amended assessments for the 2009 to 2012 income years were excessive. The AAT heard the taxpayer is a citizen of China and became a resident of Australia in 2005. It also heard the taxpayer had business dealings in Australia, China and Malaysia. The…

*Re Caporale and FCT – GST and default ITX assessments upheld – no enterprise and explanations inadequate [17]

The AAT has disallowed a taxpayer’s appeal against GST and s 167 default income tax assessments, although it set aside an administrative penalty for one of the years in question. In 2008, the ATO audited the tax affairs of the taxpayer’s family and the companies they controlled. The Tribunal said the family business in question was…

*Re CZRS and FCT – Employer’s lump sum paid for negotiated resignation was fully assessable as an ETP and was not a ‘bona fide redundancy payment’ [16]

The AAT has concluded that a lump sum payment received by an individual taxpayer was an employment termination payment (ETP) under s 82-130(1) of the ITAA 1997 and was not a genuine redundancy payment under s 83-175 of the ITAA 1997. As a result, the AAT affirmed the taxpayer was liable to income tax on the full…

*Re Track and Ors and FCT – Pt IVA applies to scheme to qualify for CGT small business concessions [15]

The AAT has confirmed that Pt IVA applied to a scheme carried out by taxpayers in order to enable them to qualify for the CGT small business concessions via the maximum net asset value (MANV) test. Interestingly, the taxpayers argued before the AAT (contrary to their original position in their lodged tax returns) that various…

LHRC & Ors v DCT (No 4) – but taxpayers obtain “confidentiality orders” re parties’ identities, documents, etc [14]

In a [decision related to the (No. 3) case above], the Federal Court granted the [same] taxpayers’ application for “confidential[ity] orders” in relation to the identity of the parties, the contents of any documents filed or tendered in the proceedings and the non-disclosure of the transcript of any hearing in the proceedings to anyone other…