Herijanto,Muin, Lie v RRT

Herijanto, Muin, and Lie (the applicants) sought leave to appeal against a decision of the Full Federal Court of Australia. The dispute concerned the validity of certain notices issued by the Commissioner of Taxation under s 264 of the *Income Tax Assessment Act 1936* (Cth) (the Act). The applicants argued that the notices were invalid because they were issued by an officer of the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) who was not authorised to do so.

The primary legal issue before Gaudron J was whether the Commissioner of Taxation had validly delegated the power to issue notices under s 264 of the Act to the officer who issued the notices in question. This involved an examination of the *Income Tax Assessment Act 1936* (Cth), specifically s 264, and the relevant administrative law principles concerning the delegation of statutory powers.

Gaudron J considered the provisions of s 264 of the Act, which confers power on the Commissioner to require persons to attend and give evidence or produce documents. Her Honour also examined the *Public Service Act 1999* (Cth) and the Public Service Regulations, as well as the Administrative Arrangements Orders, to determine the scope of the Commissioner's delegation powers. The court ultimately found that the Commissioner had validly delegated the power to issue the notices in question to the officer who issued them, and therefore the notices were valid.