The WA State Administrative Tribunal has found that a company was not a land-holder within the meaning of that term in s 76ATI of the then Stamp Act 1921 (WA) (as it stood at the relevant time).
On 30 March 2007, a subsidiary company of the first taxpayer acquired a controlling interest in A Co (the second taxpayer). A Co, at the time of the acquisition, held through one of its subsidiaries, certain mining interests in Indonesia. The Commissioner of State Revenue (SA) included those interests when valuing A Co’s “land” and other assets. That led the Commissioner to assess duty of $7.6m on the share acquisition. A Co objected saying its mining interests in Indonesia, because of their nature, did not fall within the definition of “land”. The Commissioner disallowed the objection.
The Tribunal examined the nature and characteristics of the Indonesian mining interests and considered that those interests were not “similar” to the mining tenements or rights of occupancy specified in the Act. It held that A Co was not a land-holder as at 30 March 2007 within the meaning of that term in s 76ATI of the Act. It ordered that the assessment be set aside and that duty be reassessed.
(OZ Minerals Ltd & Anor v Comr of State Revenue [2012] WASAT 188, WA State Administrative Tribunal, Sharp DP, 19 September 2012.)
[LTN 186, 25/9]