Grapsas v Unger [1986] HCA 52

Grapsas v Unger [1986] HCA 52

By majority, s. 230(1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 Cth did not apply to a registered tax agent who only prepared income tax returns for clients to sign and furnish. The appellant did not make misstatements in any return within the meaning of the section, because the taxpayers made the returns by signing and furnishing them and the appellant's conduct was preparation only. The convictions as principal offender therefore could not stand.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Appeal by Special Leave Concerning Convictions for Offences Under S. 230 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 Cth / High Court Appeal From the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Victoria Discharging Orders Nisi to Review the Convictions
Outcome
Appeal allowed with costs.
Legal Topics
['income Tax Returns' 'registered Tax Agents' 'knowingly and Wilfully Making a Misstatement' 'principal Offender' 'accessory Liability' 'actus Reus']
['taxation Law' 'criminal Law' 'statutory Interpretation'] ['income Tax Returns' 'registered Tax Agents' 'knowingly and Wilfully Making a Misstatement' 'principal Offender' 'accessory Liability' 'actus Reus']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal by Special Leave Concerning Convictions for Offences Under S. 230 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 Cth / High Court Appeal From the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Victoria Discharging Orders Nisi to Review the Convictions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a registered tax agent who prepared income tax returns containing false deductions, but did not sign or furnish the returns, made misstatements in a return within s. 230(1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 Cth.' 'Whether the appellant could be convicted as a principal offender under s. 230(1) where the taxpayers signed and furnished the returns without knowing the statements were false.']

Ratio Decidendi

By majority, s. 230(1) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 Cth did not apply to a registered tax agent who only prepared income tax returns for clients to sign and furnish. The appellant did not make misstatements in any return within the meaning of the section, because the taxpayers made the returns by signing and furnishing them and the appellant's conduct was preparation only. The convictions as principal offender therefore could not stand.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Orders of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Victoria discharging orders nisi Nos. 14, 14d, 14e and 14f set aside.' 'Orders nisi Nos. 14, 14d, 14e and 14f made absolute.' 'The convictions and fines imposed in respect of informations Nos. 919, 920, 925 and 926, including the order for costs in information No....