Trustee for B & J Chung Trust and Commissioner of Taxation
Case
•
[2022] AATA 383
•3 February 2022
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Trustee for B & J Chung Trust and Commissioner of Taxation [2022] AATA 383
[2022] AATA 383
3 February 2022
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The matter before Deputy President Bernard J McCabe of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal concerned an application for review of an objection decision made by the Commissioner of Taxation. The applicant, the trustee company for the B & J Chung Trust, sought to object to penalties imposed by the Commissioner for the 2014 and 2015 income years. The Commissioner argued that the application was invalid because the trustee company had been deregistered by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission in 2020, prior to the application for review being lodged.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it had jurisdiction to hear the application for review, given that the applicant, a company, had been deregistered. This question turned on the applicant's standing to bring the proceedings, specifically whether a deregistered company could validly lodge an application for review under Part IVC of the Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth). The Tribunal was required to consider the effect of company deregistration on the capacity to commence legal proceedings and the specific standing requirements for reviews of objection decisions under the TAA.
The Tribunal reasoned that under section 601AD(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), a company ceases to exist upon deregistration, which is akin to corporate death. As the trustee company was the entity that had lodged the objection and subsequently the application for review, its deregistration meant it no longer existed as a legal person capable of commencing or continuing proceedings. The Tribunal noted that the specific standing requirements under Part IVC of the TAA limit the right to object and seek review to the "person" assessed or in relation to whom the assessment is made. Given the company's deregistration, it was no longer such a person.
Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the application for review. The application was dismissed pursuant to section 42A(4) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth).
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it had jurisdiction to hear the application for review, given that the applicant, a company, had been deregistered. This question turned on the applicant's standing to bring the proceedings, specifically whether a deregistered company could validly lodge an application for review under Part IVC of the Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth). The Tribunal was required to consider the effect of company deregistration on the capacity to commence legal proceedings and the specific standing requirements for reviews of objection decisions under the TAA.
The Tribunal reasoned that under section 601AD(1) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), a company ceases to exist upon deregistration, which is akin to corporate death. As the trustee company was the entity that had lodged the objection and subsequently the application for review, its deregistration meant it no longer existed as a legal person capable of commencing or continuing proceedings. The Tribunal noted that the specific standing requirements under Part IVC of the TAA limit the right to object and seek review to the "person" assessed or in relation to whom the assessment is made. Given the company's deregistration, it was no longer such a person.
Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the application for review. The application was dismissed pursuant to section 42A(4) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth).
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Tax Law
-
Administrative Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Jurisdiction
-
Standing
-
Statutory Construction
-
Appeal
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
2
Statutory Material Cited
0
Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Tomaras
[2018] HCA 62
Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Tomaras
[2018] HCA 62
McCallum v Commissioner of Taxation
[1997] FCA 533