Spence and Commissioner of Taxation (Taxation)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered an application for reinstatement of original applications filed by Mr Spence. The dispute arose because Mr Spence sought to reinstate applications that had previously been dismissed by the Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the original applications had been dismissed "in error," a precondition for the exercise of the reinstatement power under section 42A(10) of the *Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975*. The Tribunal also considered whether there was any utility in reinstating applications that were destined to fail due to a lack of jurisdiction.

Deputy President S E Frost P reasoned that the original applications were not dismissed in error. This was because the purported objection decision upon which the applications were based was invalid, meaning there was no valid objection decision to be reviewed by the Tribunal under Part IVC of the *Taxation Administration Act 1953*. Consequently, the dismissal of the applications for lack of jurisdiction on 27 January 2016 was correct. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that Mr Spence continued to maintain that his originating document was invalid, and given this and the Commissioner's acceptance of this position, reinstatement would serve no purpose as the applications would inevitably fail again. The Tribunal observed that Mr Spence had since lodged valid objections and applied for review of those decisions, which was the appropriate course of action.

The application for reinstatement was refused.