Deputy Commissioner of Taxation, in the matter of Roncyn Pty Limited (ACN 098 708 911)

[2006] FCA 877

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Deputy Commissioner of Taxation, in the matter of Roncyn Pty Limited
(ACN 098 708 911) [2006] FCA 877

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION v RONCYN PTY LIMITED
(ACN 098 708 911)

NSD584 OF 2006

EMMETT J
30 JUNE 2006
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD584 OF 2006

In the matter of Roncyn Pty Limited (ACN 098 708 911)

BETWEEN:	DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION PLAINTIFF
AND:	RONCYN PTY LIMITED (ACN 098 708 911) DEFENDANT
JUDGE:	EMMETT J
DATE OF ORDER:	30 JUNE 2006
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The winding-up of Roncyn Pty Ltd (ACN 098 708 911) be terminated on 30 June 2006.

2.The official liquidator pay from his trust account for Roncyn Pty Ltd the following sums to the following parties:

(a)   $117,653.01 to the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation.

(b)   $16,391.94 to himself in respect of his costs of the winding-up to date.

(c)   $1,771.00 to himself in respect of his legal costs.

(d)   $1,077.28 to the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation in accordance with the Order of Registrar Hedge on 28 April 2006, if that sum has not yet been paid by the liquidator.

(e)   The balance of the monies held in trust by the official liquidator to the St George Bank account in the name of Roncyn Pty Ltd.

Note:   Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD584 OF 2006

In the matter of Roncyn Pty Limited (ACN 098 708 911)

BETWEEN:	DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION PLAINTIFF
AND:	RONCYN PTY LIMITED (ACN 098 708 911) DEFENDANT

JUDGE:	EMMETT J
DATE:	30 JUNE 2006
PLACE:	SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. On 28 April 2006, a winding up order was made in respect of the defendant, Roncyn Pty Ltd (‘the Company’), on the application of the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation (‘Deputy Commissioner’).  On 31 May 2006, Cynthia Hardie, a director of the Company, applied to the Court for an order that the winding up order be vacated or, alternatively, that the winding-up be terminated.  There is no basis for the vacation of the order, which appears to have been properly made.  However, for the reasons which I shall briefly state, I consider that it is appropriate that the winding up be terminated today.

2. Mr Jason Hammond is the accountant of the Company.  Mr Hammond considered a levy by the Australian Taxation Office for a PAYG instalment in November 2005 was unexpectedly high.  Following a statutory demand by the Deputy Commissioner on 24 January 2006, he communicated by telephone with officers of the Australian Taxation Office.  As a result of that conversation, he understood that a statutory demand would be stayed, or would remain on hold, until the amount of the tax had been settled. 

3. However, in March 2006, Mr Hammond received the winding up application.  He then had another telephone conversation with an officer of the Australian Taxation Office.  As a result of that conversation, he thought that the winding up application would be stayed until the amount of the tax liability was clarified.  The winding up application came before the Court on 28 April 2006, when there was no appearance for the Company.  The winding up application was based on an alleged debt of some $218,679.80.  In fact, the liability of the Company is no more than $117,000.  The present applicant, Ms Hardie, was not aware of the liquidation until she received a communication from the liquidator’s office. 

4. At the time of the winding up order, a sum of $221,500 in an account with the St George bank in the name of the Company was transferred to the trust account of the liquidator of the Company.  The liquidator has indicated that he neither opposes nor consents to the application, but has also indicated that the Company has assets sufficient to meet any debts of which the liquidator is aware.  The liquidator has funds to meet the debt presently owing to the Deputy Commissioner, the liquidator’s costs and the Deputy Commissioner’s legal expenses.  There will be a balance available to be remitted to the Company and the Company will have ample assets to meet its liabilities.

5. In the circumstances, I consider that it is appropriate to order, pursuant to s 482(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), that the winding up of the Company be terminated today.

I certify that the preceding five (5) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Emmett.

Associate:

Dated:            6 July 2006

Counsel for the Applicant:	Mr J. O’Connor
Solicitor for the Applicant:	Bilbie Dan
Solicitor for the Liquidator:	Leonard Legal
Date of Hearing:	30 June 2006
Date of Judgment:	30 June 2006