PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Kerajaan Malaysia PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN SAYYID SHAH BIN ABDULLAH

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Kerajaan Malaysia PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN SAYYID SHAH BIN ABDULLAH

A pending appeal to SCIT, by itself, does not constitute sufficient reason to stay bankruptcy proceedings under s.97 IA or the residual power; the JD failed to show blameless delay, abuse of the tax model or a breakdown of statutory processes that would justify curial intervention; accordingly both appeals to stay were dismissed and costs awarded.

Citation
WA-29NCC-80-01/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Judgment Debtor: Sayyid Shah bin Abdullah; Judgment Creditor: Government of Malaysia (Lembaga Hasil Dalam Negeri, Wilayah Persekutuan, Kuala Lumpur)
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
3 November 2025
Case Number
WA-29NCC-80-01/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy / Appellate (appeals Against SAR Refusals to Stay Bankruptcy Proceedings)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Stay of Proceedings, Bankruptcy Petition, SCIT Appeals, Pay Now Dispute Later Tax Model
Source Language
Malay/English
Tax Law Insolvency Law Civil Procedure Administrative Law Stay of Proceedings Bankruptcy Petition SCIT Appeals Pay Now Dispute Later Tax Model

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sayyid Shah bin Abdullah

Judgment Debtor

Government of Malaysia (Lembaga Hasil Dalam Negeri, Wilayah Persekutuan, Kuala Lumpur)

Judgment Creditor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy / Appellate (appeals Against SAR Refusals to Stay Bankruptcy Proceedings)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a stay of bankruptcy proceedings should be granted pending appeal to the Special Commissioners of Income Tax (SCIT)
  2. 2 Whether a pending SCIT appeal constitutes 'sufficient reason' under s.97 Insolvency Act 1967 or under the residual power recognised by the Federal Court
  3. 3 Whether delay or breakdown in the tax appeal process or abuse of the tax model permits curial intervention to stay recovery proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

A pending appeal to SCIT, by itself, does not constitute sufficient reason to stay bankruptcy proceedings under s.97 IA or the residual power; the JD failed to show blameless delay, abuse of the tax model or a breakdown of statutory processes that would justify curial intervention; accordingly both appeals to stay were dismissed and costs awarded.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Dismissed both appeals Encl 104 and Encl 135
  • Costs of RM4,000.00 awarded for each appeal