Chhua and Commissioner of Taxation (Taxation)

This matter concerned an application to set aside a summons issued by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) to a former employee of the Australian Taxation Office. The applicant, Chhua, sought to call this former employee as a witness in proceedings reviewing a taxation decision. The former employee, through correspondence with the Tribunal, indicated he had no recollection of the events in question due to the passage of time.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it possessed the power to set aside a summons that had already been issued, and if so, on what grounds. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the evidence sought from the former employee would be relevant and assist in the review of the principal application, a key consideration for setting aside a summons. The Tribunal considered its broad procedural discretion under section 33 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975, which allows it to conduct proceedings with as little formality and technicality as possible while ensuring a proper consideration of the matters before it.

The Tribunal reasoned that its discretion under section 33 extended to setting aside a summons already issued, aligning with previous decisions such as *Jones*. This power is necessary to ensure that the Tribunal's processes are efficient and that evidence considered is genuinely relevant. In this instance, the former employee's clear statement that he had no recollection of the events, and the absence of any other evidence suggesting he could provide relevant testimony, meant his evidence would not assist in the review of the decision.

Consequently, the Tribunal ordered that the summons issued to the former employee be set aside, releasing him from the obligation to attend and give evidence.