Clark and Commissioner of Taxation (Taxation)

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Clark against the Commissioner of Taxation's decision to refuse his requests for extensions of time to lodge objections against his income tax assessments for several years. Mr Clark, an employee of Aurizon, incurred meal expenses while travelling for work, for which he received a travel allowance from his employer. He had not disclosed these allowances or claimed deductions for meal expenses in his original tax returns. Through his objections, Mr Clark sought to disclose the allowances and claim deductions for meal expenses, calculated according to the Commissioner's published "reasonable amounts" for travel allowance expenses.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether to grant Mr Clark extensions of time to lodge his objections. This involved considering the discretion available under section 14ZW of the *Taxation Administration Act 1953* (Cth), which requires the applicant to state fully and in detail the circumstances and reasons for the failure to lodge within the required period. The Tribunal also considered other relevant factors, including whether the applicant had a good case on objection and any prejudice to the Commissioner or the applicant if the request were granted or refused, with the overarching principle being that time limits should not be departed from without good reason.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the substantiation exception for travel allowance expenses (Subdivision 900-B of the *Income Tax Assessment Act 1997* (Cth)) relieves taxpayers from the requirement to retain detailed records, it does not exempt them from the fundamental requirement that the expense must actually be incurred and qualify as a deduction under section 8-1 of the *Income Tax Assessment Act 1997* (Cth). The evidence suggested that Mr Clark had not incurred expenditure in the order of the "reasonable amounts" he sought to claim. Consequently, his objections were considered to have little prospect of leading to a reduction in his tax liability, making it futile to extend the time for objections.

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the Commissioner's decisions to refuse the applications for extensions of time to object.