Whittaker v Simpson

Case [2014] QDC 289


DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Whittaker v Simpson [2014] QDC 289

PARTIES:

MARK ALAN WHITTAKER

(appellant)
v
CHRISTIAN TIMOTHY SIMPSON          
(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

APPEAL NO: D75/2014

DIVISION:

Appellate

PROCEEDING:

Appeal

ORIGINATING COURT:

Magistrates Court, Cairns

DELIVERED ON:

17 December 2014

DELIVERED AT:

Cairns

HEARING DATE:

14 November 2014

JUDGE:

MORZONE QC DCJ

ORDER:

1.   Appeal dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW - appeal - conviction - 8 counts of failing to give to the Commissioner of Taxation income tax returns for eight financial years when required to do so under the taxation law – mode of hearing of appeal – particulars of complaint – disclosure – elements of offence - whether a “person” within the meaning of s 162 Income Tax Assessment Act – purported withdrawal of authority to use of tax file number – “in the approved form” – conviction
Legislation
Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cth), s 162
Justices Act 1886 (Qld) s 222, s 223(1), 227
Taxation Administration Act 1958 (Cth), s 8C(1)
Cases
 R v Rollason & Jenkins, ex parte A-G (Qld) [2007] QCA 65

COUNSEL:

Appellant appeared in person

Mr G Lynham for the Respondent

SOLICITORS:

The Office of The Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions for the respondent

  1. On 3 April 2014, after a summary trial in the Magistrates Court held in Cairns, the appellant was convicted of eight charges under s 8C(1)(a) Taxation Administration Act 1953 (“TAA”) relating to his failure to give to the Commissioner of Taxation income tax returns for eight financial years.

  1. The appellant now appeals his convictions.

  1. The appellant was self-represented at the appeal hearing.  Both parties provided outlines of argument, and made further submissions on the hearing of the appeal.

Background

  1. On 15 June 2012, the Deputy Commissioner of Taxation issued to the appellant a final notice under s 162 Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cth) ("ITAA"), which required the appellant to furnish to the Commissioner of Taxation income tax returns for the eight financial years ending 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010 by 10 August 2012.

  1. The appellant was charged with eight offences contrary to s 8C(1)(a) TAA relating to his failure to give to the Commissioner of Taxation income tax returns for the financial years ending 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010.

  1. The appellant pleaded not guilty to all eight charges, and the matter proceeded by way of summary hearing on 19 March 2014.  The appellant elected to testify and was cross-examined.  During the hearing, the appellant admitted that he received the final notice[1] and that he did not lodge any of the income tax returns alleged in each of the eight charges.[2]  These were not disputed on appeal.

    [1]T.1-95 ll.27-29; T.107

    [2]T.101 ll.44-46; T.105 l.37 – T.106 l.14

  1. The prosecution case against the appellant was that:

1.          The final notice was valid;

2.          The appellant received the final notice;

3.          The appellant failed to comply with the final notice in that he did not furnish the income tax…

Continue reading Whittaker v Simpson

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Whittaker v Simpson [2014] QDC 289
Case
[2014] QDC 289
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Whittaker appealed against his conviction on eight counts of failing to give to the Commissioner of Taxation income tax returns for eight financial years when required to do so under the taxation law. The appeal was heard by the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory. The central issue before the court was whether the appellant was a "person" within the meaning of section 162 of the Income Tax Assessment Act, and whether he was required to give the Commissioner of Taxation income tax returns for the relevant financial years. The court also needed to determine whether the appellant had properly withdrawn his authority for the use of his tax file number.

The court held that the appellant was indeed a "person" within the meaning of section 162 of the Income Tax Assessment Act. It was established that the appellant had failed to give the Commissioner of Taxation income tax returns for the relevant financial years. The court found that the appellant's argument that he had withdrawn his authority for the use of his tax file number was without merit. The court was satisfied that the appellant was required to give the Commissioner of Taxation income tax returns for the relevant financial years. The mode of hearing of the appeal and the particulars of complaint were also considered, and the court found that the disclosure was adequate for the purposes of the appeal. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, and the conviction upheld.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Appeal dismissed.

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.