Daily Archives: March 2, 2017

Re Bezuidenhout and FCT – Taxpayer was a resident of Australia; assessable on foreign income [35]

The AAT has held a taxpayer was a resident of Australia within the meaning of s 6(1) of the ITAA 1936 for the 2006 to 2008 income years. Accordingly, it affirmed the Commissioner’s decision to assess the taxpayer on various foreign income earned in the relevant periods. The taxpayer migrated to Australia in 2005 with his…

Re Daniels and FCT – Taxpayer liable for $129k of CGT on disposal of Panamanian shares and a 50% shortfall penalty [34]

The AAT has affirmed the Commissioner’s decision that a taxpayer was liable for a capital gain made on disposal of shares in a Panamanian company for the 2006-07 income year. In addition, it also affirmed the 50% shortfall penalty imposed by the Commissioner. The Commissioner commenced an audit of the taxpayer’s affairs and associated entities…

Re The Employed Accountant and FCT – Taxpayer not assessable on bank deposits [33]

The AAT has held that a taxpayer satisfied the burden of proof that certain deposits to his bank account were not assessable to him. In addition, it held that interest paid on loans for investment properties were deductible to the taxpayer. However, the AAT held that the taxpayer was liable to an administrative penalty of…

Re Rigoli and FCT – Depreciation deductions on some capital items allowed [32]

A taxpayer has been partially successful before the AAT in relation to claims for depreciation for certain items of plant and equipment by a partnership (of which the taxpayer was found to be a partner). The AAT found that those items of plant and equipment were used in the business conducted by the partnership, being…

*Re Building Company Owner and FCT – Discretion to disregard Div 7A not exercised in 2005, but was exercised in 2006 and 2007 for not properly documenting loans [31]

The AAT has exercised the discretion to disregard the operation of Div 7A on the grounds there was an honest mistake in not properly documenting loans by a private company to a shareholder. The taxpayer was a shareholder and director of a building company. In the 2005 income year, the company transferred money to the…

Federal Circuit Court (Consequential Amendments) Bill introduced [30]

The Federal Circuit Court of Australia (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2012 was introduced in the House of Reps on Wed 28.11.2012. It will operate together with the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Legislation Amendment Bill 2012, and makes consequential amendments to Commonwealth legislation to reflect changes to the name of the Federal Magistrates Court and the…

The Federal Magistrates Court will be re-named the Federal Circuit Court under the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Legislation Amendment Bill 2012 [29]

The Federal Circuit Court of Australia Legislation Amendment Bill 2012 has now passed all stages without amendment and awaits Royal Assent. The Bill will amend the Federal Magistrates Act 1999 and other legislation to rename the Federal Magistrates Court as the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, and to change the title of Chief Federal Magistrate…

DCT v Chemical Trustee Limited (No 7) – Taxpayers’ notices to DCT to produce documents mostly set aside [28]

The Federal Court has largely set aside notices to produce documents served by the taxpayer on a Deputy Commissioner of Taxation. On 25 September 2012, the solicitors for the taxpayer served a notice to produce documents on the solicitors for the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation.  The notice sought various documents and communications. The Deputy Commissioner…

*Kahn v FCT – Judiciary Act claim for credits in relation to PAYG withheld but not remitted dismissed as an abuse of process [27]

The Federal Court has dismissed a proceeding where a taxpayer sought relief under the Judiciary Act 1903 concerning the Commissioner’s disallowance of credits for PAYG tax. The taxpayer sought relief under s 39B of the Judiciary Act, claiming that a declaration that the Commissioner’s decision to refuse to allow him a credit in respect of…

*Visy Packaging Holdings Pty Ltd v FCT – Visy entitled to deduction for losses on resale of non-packaging businesses acquired from Southcorp [26]

The Federal Court has held that the taxpayers, which were part of the Visy group of companies (and were ultimately owned by the Pratt Group), were entitled to a deduction, under s 8-1 of the ITAA 1997, for losses of some $75m, realised on the sale of a range of businesses. The Court arrived at…