Sunrise Auto Ltd v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Sunrise Auto Ltd Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Sunrise Auto Ltd [1995] FCA 969

Sunrise Auto Ltd v Deputy Commissioner of Taxation Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Sunrise Auto Ltd Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Sunrise Auto Ltd [1995] FCA 969

Service of notice of assessment at the address derived from bank records and recorded by Commissioner’s officer satisfied Regulation 38’s requirements as the address for service; the memorandum was an adequate 'record in the custody of the Commissioner.' The s.218 garnishee notice was not invalid for purported defects in service or taxpayer status. The Court has jurisdiction to entertain Sunrise’s claims as a third party, but substantive challenges to assessment correctness are foreclosed except via proceedings under Part IVC or in cases meeting Hickman criteria. Amounts assessed remain due by the taxpayer until validly varied or set aside.

Parties
Appellant/respondent: Sunrise Auto Limited; Respondent/appellant: Deputy Commissioner of Taxation
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 November 1995
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeals From Orders Answering Separate Questions; Orders on Particulars and Costs
Outcome
Appeal No. QG 122 of 1994 dismissed; Appeal No. QG 129 of 1994 allowed in part and answer varied; Appeal No. QG 163 of 1994 stood over generally with liberty to restore. Liberty reserved to apply for costs by written submissions within 28 days.
Legal Topics
Statutory Garnishee Provisions, Service of Notice of Assessment, Withholding Tax, Jurisdiction to Challenge Assessments, Standing of Third Parties, Operation of S.177(1) Income Tax Assessment Act
Taxation Law Statutory Garnishee Provisions Service of Notice of Assessment Withholding Tax Jurisdiction to Challenge Assessments Standing of Third Parties Operation of S.177(1) Income Tax Assessment Act

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 5 Authorities cited 44 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sunrise Auto Limited

Appellant/respondent

Deputy Commissioner of Taxation

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeals From Orders Answering Separate Questions; Orders on Particulars and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether service of notice of assessment was valid under the regulations
  2. 2 Whether s.218 statutory garnishee notice was invalid due to improper service or incorrect taxpayer status
  3. 3 Whether Court has jurisdiction to entertain challenge by a third party to validity of notice of assessment; scope for objections under s.177

Ratio Decidendi

Service of notice of assessment at the address derived from bank records and recorded by Commissioner’s officer satisfied Regulation 38’s requirements as the address for service; the memorandum was an adequate 'record in the custody of the Commissioner.' The s.218 garnishee notice was not invalid for purported defects in service or taxpayer status. The Court has jurisdiction to entertain Sunrise’s claims as a third party, but substantive challenges to assessment correctness are foreclosed except via proceedings under Part IVC or in cases meeting Hickman criteria. Amounts assessed remain due by the taxpayer until validly varied or set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal No. QG 122 of 1994 dismissed; Appeal No. QG 129 of 1994 allowed in part and answer varied; Appeal No. QG 163 of 1994 stood over generally with liberty to restore. Liberty reserved to apply for costs by written submissions within 28 days.

Orders

  • Appeal No. QG 122 of 1994 dismissed.
  • In Appeal No. QG 129 of 1994, answer to second question varied: Court has jurisdiction to entertain Sunrise's claims, with qualifications per ratio.