Administrative Appeals Tribunal
DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2011] AATA 641
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL )
) No 2011/1434
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION ) Re MOHAMMED SHAHEED Applicant
And
TAX PRACTITIONERS' BOARD
Respondent
DECISION
Tribunal Ms N Isenberg, Senior Member Date13 September 2011
PlaceSydney
Decision The Tribunal sets aside the summons issued on 8 August 2011. ....................[sgd]........................
Ms N Isenberg
Senior Member
CATCHWORDS
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - summons for produce of documents - grounds on which a summons may be set aside - adjectival relevance - parameters of abuse of process - whether oppressive - summons set aside.
Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975
Tax Agent (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009
Cosco Holdings Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1997] FCA 1504; (1997) 37 ATR 432
General Merchandise and Apparel Group Pty Ltd and CEO of Customs [2009] AATA 988; (2009) 114 ALD 289
Phillips and Inspector-General in Bankruptcy [2011] AATA 432
Shaheed and Tax Agents’ Board of New South Wales [2006] AATA 880; (2006) 92 ALD 758
Shaheed v Tax Agents’ Board of New South Wales [2008] FCA 703; (2008) 72 ATR 1Shi v Migration Agents Registration Authority [2008] HCA 31; (2008) 235 CLR 286
Trade Practices Commission v Arnotts Ltd (No 2) (1989) 88 ALR 90
VHAU of 2002 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2003] FCA 376
REASONS FOR DECISION
13 September 2011 Ms N Isenberg, Senior Member ISSUE
1.On 8 August 2011 the Tribunal, through its standard registry procedures, issued a summons to produce documents at the request of the Applicant. The party to which the summons was addressed, the Australian Government Solicitor, is the representative of the Respondent in the substantive matter before the Tribunal, and requests that the summons be set aside.
BACKGROUND
2.In the substantive matter before the Tribunal, the Applicant seeks review of a decision of the Tax Practitioners’ Board (the Board) to reject his application for transitional registration as a tax agent under section 20-25(1) of the Tax Agent Services Act 2009 (the TAS Act) and item 13 of schedule 2 to the Tax Agent (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009.
3.The application was rejected, in part, because the Board was not satisfied that the Applicant was a "fit and proper" person (within the meaning of the TAS Act). The Board was not satisfied that the information provided by the Applicant was sufficient to demonstrate that he is of "good fame, integrity and character" having regard to the previous adverse findings made against him by the Tribunal in Shaheed and Tax Agents’ Board of New South Wales [2006] AATA 880; (2006) 92 ALD 758, in which the Tribunal affirmed the decision not to renew his registration as a tax agent. That decision was upheld by the Federal Court in Shaheed v Tax Agents' Board of New South Wales [2008] FCA 703; (2008) 72…
Continue reading Shaheed and Tax Practitioners' Board
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Shaheed and Tax Practitioners' Board [2011] AATA 641
- Case
- [2011] AATA 641
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue the court had to address was whether the summons was oppressive or an abuse of process, thereby justifying its setting aside. The court had to consider the principles established in previous cases, such as those concerning the adjectival relevance and the parameters of abuse of process. The court also had to assess whether the summons was issued for a purpose that was relevant to the investigation being conducted by the Board. The court examined the statutory framework under the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975, the Tax Agent (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2009, and the Tax Agent Services Act 2009, to determine the legality and appropriateness of the summons.
In its reasoning, the court found that the summons was indeed oppressive and an abuse of process. The court held that the summons did not align with the statutory objectives and was issued for a purpose that was extraneous to the investigation. The court also noted that the summons did not have adjectival relevance to the proceedings and was therefore likely to cause unnecessary hardship to Shaheed. As a result, the summons was set aside. The court's decision was influenced by precedents such as Shi v Migration Agents Registration Authority and Cosco Holdings Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation, which emphasised the need to prevent oppressive and abusive processes in administrative law.
The court ordered that the summons issued on 8 August 2011 be set aside. This decision underscores the importance of ensuring that administrative processes are conducted fairly and within the bounds of the law, protecting individuals from unnecessary burdens and potential abuses.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Tribunal sets aside the summons issued on 8 August 2011.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.