Duncan and Commissioner of Taxation (Taxation)

Case

[2024] AATA 974

7 May 2024


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Duncan and Commissioner of Taxation (Taxation) [2024] AATA 974 [2024] AATA 974 7 May 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Duncan against a decision of the Commissioner of Taxation regarding his entitlement to claim food and drink expenses as a deduction for the year ending 30 June 2021. Mr Duncan, a long-haul road-transport driver, claimed $28,200 for food and drink expenses, based on $100 per day for 282 days on the road. The Commissioner allowed $8,393 of this amount, representing actual expenditure at roadhouse cafes. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr Duncan was entitled to a deduction for food and drink expenses beyond the amount already allowed by the Commissioner.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Mr Duncan had kept appropriate records to substantiate his claimed expenses, and if not, whether he met the conditions for a substantiation exception. The Tribunal also considered the onus on Mr Duncan to demonstrate what the correct assessment should have been, particularly in light of his inability to provide direct evidence due to suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. The Tribunal had to assess the reliability of the evidence presented, including an email purporting to be a retrospective analysis of shopping receipts.

The Tribunal affirmed the Commissioner's decision. It found that Mr Duncan had not kept appropriate records as required by the *Income Tax Assessment Act 1936* (Cth). Furthermore, the Tribunal determined that the conditions for a substantiation exception were not satisfied, and there was no sufficient evidentiary basis for the claimed level of expense. The Tribunal noted that while Mr Duncan received a travelling allowance under the relevant award, this did not automatically entitle him to a deduction for expenses exceeding that allowance. Crucially, the Tribunal found that Mr Duncan had not discharged his onus to prove what the correct assessment should have been, particularly due to the lack of reliable evidence regarding his actual expenditure on food and drink, including when he prepared meals himself in his vehicle.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Tax Law

  • Statutory Interpretation

Legal Concepts

  • Appeal

  • Statutory Construction