A sentence of four years imprisonment with only four months actual custody for a taxation fraud involving over $600,000 in evaded tax was manifestly inadequate notwithstanding significant mitigating factors including prior good character, full repayment, cooperation, and the influence of a co-offender. A period of 15 months actual imprisonment was substituted. The case confirms that s 19AB(1) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) does not permit both a non-parole period and a recognizance release order to be imposed as part of the same sentence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.