Deputy Commissioner Of Taxation and Changran Huang

The Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (DTC) sought to recover from Changran Huang a sum of money representing unpaid income tax. The dispute concerned the validity of a notice of assessment issued by the DTC to Mr Huang, and whether that notice was properly served. The matter came before the High Court of Australia on appeal from the Federal Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the notice of assessment had been validly served on Mr Huang in accordance with the requirements of the *Income Tax Assessment Act 1936* (Cth) and the *Acts Interpretation Act 1901* (Cth). Specifically, the court had to determine whether the notice, sent by ordinary post to an address that was not Mr Huang's usual or last known place of abode or business, constituted valid service.

Gageler and Keane JJ held that the notice of assessment had not been validly served. Their Honours reasoned that for service by post to be effective under the *Income Tax Assessment Act 1936*, the notice must be sent to the taxpayer's "usual or last known place of abode or business." The evidence did not establish that the address used by the DTC was Mr Huang's usual or last known place of abode or business. Consequently, the notice was not served in accordance with the statutory requirements, and the DTC was therefore unable to recover the assessed tax from Mr Huang.