R v Cain; Ex parte Evatt [1975] HCA 57

R v Cain; Ex parte Evatt [1975] HCA 57

Sutton v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation was indistinguishable and binding; a statement in the form used by the Commissioner was sufficient compliance with reg. 35(1)(c), and the Commissioner had not failed to comply with reg. 35. The order nisi for mandamus was therefore discharged.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Application for a Writ of Mandamus Directed to the Commissioner of Taxation / Order Nisi
Outcome
Order nisi discharged. Prosecutor to pay respondent's costs.
Legal Topics
['income Tax Objections' 'reference to Board of Review' "commissioner's Reasons for Disallowing Taxpayer's Claim" 'income Tax Regulations Reg. 35' 'default Assessments' 'mandamus' 'high Court Reconsideration of Its Own Decisions']
['taxation Law' 'administrative Law'] ['income Tax Objections' 'reference to Board of Review' "commissioner's Reasons for Disallowing Taxpayer's Claim" 'income Tax Regulations Reg. 35' 'default Assessments' 'mandamus' 'high Court Reconsideration of Its Own Decisions']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for a Writ of Mandamus Directed to the Commissioner of Taxation / Order Nisi

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Commissioner failed to comply with reg. 35 of the Income Tax Regulations when referring the taxpayer's objections to a Board of Review." "Whether reg. 35(1)(c) required the Commissioner to deal with all substantial questions of law and fact raised by the taxpayer and give reasons for rejecting the taxpayer's objections and assertions." 'Whether Sutton v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation should be distinguished or overruled.']

Ratio Decidendi

Sutton v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation was indistinguishable and binding; a statement in the form used by the Commissioner was sufficient compliance with reg. 35(1)(c), and the Commissioner had not failed to comply with reg. 35. The order nisi for mandamus was therefore discharged.

Court Disposition

Order nisi discharged. Prosecutor to pay respondent's costs.

Orders

  • ['Order nisi discharged.' "Prosecutor to pay respondent's costs."]