Softex Industries Pty Ltd, Re

[2001] QSC 377

Supreme Court of Queensland

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Corporations
2. › Winding up
3. › Statutory demand
4. › Application to set aside
5. › Discretion under s 459J(1)(b)
6. › Whether oppressive for Commissioner of Taxation to include disputed tax in statutory demand
7. › Whether pending AAT proceeding relevant to exercise of discretion
8. › Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), ss 459F, 459H, 459J
1. Corporations
2. › Winding up
3. › Statutory demand
4. › Offsetting claim under s 459H
5. › Whether claim for sales tax refund subject to special leave application constitutes offsetting claim
6. › Effect of exhaustion of appeals as of right
7. › Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 459H(5)
1. Revenue Law
2. › Sales tax
3. › Refund claims
4. › Whether application for special leave to appeal to High Court constitutes proceedings on foot
5. › Sales Tax Assessment Act 1992 (Cth), s 116(2)
1. Revenue Law
2. › Income tax
3. › Assessability of government assistance payments
4. › Transitional Assistance Payment Scheme
5. › Effect of conclusive evidence provisions on statutory demand proceedings
6. › Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cth), ss 25(1), 26(g), 26(j)

Quick Take

Where the Commissioner of Taxation includes in a statutory demand an amount of disputed tax that is the subject of a pending AAT proceeding with a reserved decision, this may constitute oppressive conduct justifying setting aside the entire demand under s 459J(1)(b), particularly where the Commissioner's own delay contributed to the dispute remaining unresolved. A claim for a tax refund that has been unsuccessful through all appeals as of right and is the subject only of an application for special leave to appeal to the High Court cannot constitute an offsetting claim under s 459H(5).