Category Archives: Tax Month – October 2013

*Re AP Energy Investments Limited and FCT – Commissioner is appealing the AAT decision that the sale of the mining company was not taxable [27]

The Commissioner has lodged a notice of appeal to the Federal Court against the decision in AAT Case [2013] AATA 626, Re AP Energy Investments Limited and FCT. In that case, the AAT ruled that a Chinese company which made a capital gain of some $4m in the 2007 income year, when it sold the…

Re Carter v FCT – decision on ATO’s benchmarks for Florists stands: taxpayer discontinues her application for an extension of time in which to appeal [26]

The taxpayer has discontinued her application to seek an extension of time in which to lodge an appeal against the decision in AAT Case [2013] AATA 141, Re Carter and FCT. In that case, the AAT dismissed the taxpayer’s appeal against income tax and GST assessments issued following an ATO audit of her florist business.…

*Symond v Gadens Lawyers Sydney Pty Ltd (No 2) – Taxpayer wins damages for negligent advice re tax liability from company restructure [25]

In a decision handed down on Thur 31.10.2013, the NSW Supreme Court has awarded damages to the plaintiff in the sum of $4,979,800 relating to certain tax advice he had received. On 19 July 2013 (in Symond v Gadens Lawyers Sydney Pty Ltd [2013] NSWSC 955), the Court had held that solicitors who advised Mr John Symond, founder…

*Australasian Annuities Pty Ltd (in liq) v Rowley Super Fund Pty Ltd – director breached fiduciary duty in making super payments to himself and family [24]

The Victorian Supreme Court has found that the sole director of a family trust company had breached fiduciary duties owed to the company by facilitating the making of contributions to a super fund on behalf of individual members of the super fund. The director had arranged for the company to borrow some $2.5m to make…

*Zampbeacon Pty Ltd v DCT – Application to set aside statutory demand for RBA debt dismissed [23]

The Supreme Court of Victoria has dismissed an application by a taxpayer to set aside a Deputy Commissioner’s statutory demand for payment of a Running Balance Account (RBA) deficit debt of over $320,000. The taxpayer argued that the demand should be set aside on the basis that it did not particularise the various component or…

*Hancock & Anor v Rinehart & Ors – Trustee waived privilege on legal advice contained in accountants’ tax advice [22]

The NSW Supreme Court has ruled that a trustee of a family trust had waived her privilege on legal advice contained in tax advice provided by the trust’s accountants. The trustee claimed legal professional privilege (LPP) in relation to documents produced in answer to a subpoena served on the trust’s accountants who had provided tax…

*Re Schlottmann and FCT – Car and work-related expenses denied – except to extent of cents per km basis [21]

A taxpayer who claimed id=”mce_marker”0,104 for work-related car expenses and $6,497 for other work related expenses in his 2009-10 tax return, which the Commissioner disallowed, has been partly successful before the AAT – but only to the extent of being allowed car expenses totalling $3,150 under the cents per kilometre method based on 63 cents…

*Re Rasmussen and FCT – taxpayer faced serious hardship but this was not caused by having to pay the $30k of tax and relief was denied [20]

The AAT has affirmed the Commissioner’s decision refusing to release a taxpayer from his tax liability under s 340-5(3) of the TAA. The Tribunal heard that essentially due to the taxpayer’s wife’s illness, he had been increasingly required to care for her as well as their 2 teenage children, and that this combined with a lack…

*Re DBTL and Innovation Australia – Activities associated with deeper mining pits fail to qualify as R&D [19]

The AAT has denied all the applicant’s claims for R&D deductions in respect of the activities it carried out at its open-cut coal mine in NSW from January 2000 to 31 December 2005 despite the Industry Research and Development Board (the Board), in the matter before the AAT, accepting that some of the activities qualified as relevant R&D activities.…

*Re Keep and FCT- CGT exemption refused because evidence didn’t establish it became the ‘main residence’ as soon as practicable after completion etc. [18]

The AAT has affirmed the Commissioner’s decision denying a taxpayer’s claim for the CGT main residence exemption in relation to a disposal of a property. The taxpayer submitted that he had purchased the property in July 2002 with this then de facto partner. The construction of the house commenced in April 2004; however, his relationship with his then partner…