Pompano Pty Ltd ( ACN 010 634 689) and Anor v Assistant Commissioner Michael James Condon

The applicants, Pompano Pty Ltd and another, sought judicial review of a decision made by the Assistant Commissioner Michael James Condon, an officer of the Australian Taxation Office. The dispute concerned the validity of notices of assessment issued by the Assistant Commissioner to the applicants. The matter came before Kiefel J of the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the notices of assessment issued by the Assistant Commissioner were validly made, specifically in relation to the requirements of section 169 of the *Income Tax Assessment Act 1936* (Cth) (the Act). This involved determining whether the notices sufficiently identified the relevant income tax periods and whether they were properly signed or authenticated in accordance with the Act.

Kiefel J found that the notices of assessment were invalid. His Honour reasoned that section 169 of the Act requires that a notice of assessment must specify the year or years of income to which it relates. The notices in question failed to do so, instead referring to "the relevant income tax periods" without further particularisation. This lack of specificity rendered the notices defective. Furthermore, the Court considered the requirements for authentication of such notices, finding that the method of authentication used did not comply with the statutory requirements.

Consequently, Kiefel J made orders setting aside the notices of assessment issued by the Assistant Commissioner.