PA-25-39-7/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

PA-25-39-7/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The application for extension of time and leave for judicial review was dismissed because it was filed outside the mandatory three-month period without good reason to extend time, and the impugned DGIR and Minister decisions were not final or amenable to judicial review given the statutory appeal remedy to the Special Commissioners of Income Tax; accordingly the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the JR and ordered costs of RM5,000 to each respondent.

Citation
PA-25-39-7/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Applicant: Daniel John Beasley; First Respondent: Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri; Second Respondent: Menteri Kewangan Malaysia
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
21 February 2022
Case Number
PA-25-39-7/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (permohonan Bagi Semakan Kehakiman) / Leave Stage (application for Leave and Stay Decided)
Outcome
Application for extension of time and leave to commence judicial review dismissed for want of jurisdiction and prematurity.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Amenability to Judicial Review, Tax Assessment, Individual Income Tax Exemption (p.u.(a)382/2003), Statutory Appeal to Special Commissioners of Income Tax (scit)
Source Language
Malay/English
Administrative Law Tax Law Procedure Extension of Time Amenability to Judicial Review Tax Assessment Individual Income Tax Exemption (p.u.(a)382/2003) Statutory Appeal to Special Commissioners of Income Tax (scit)

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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel John Beasley

Applicant

Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri

First Respondent

Menteri Kewangan Malaysia

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (permohonan Bagi Semakan Kehakiman) / Leave Stage (application for Leave and Stay Decided)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judicial review application was filed within time or whether extension of time should be granted under Order 53 r.3(6)-(7) ROC
  2. 2 Whether the impugned decisions/notices of the DGIR and the Minister are final and amenable to judicial review or premature given statutory appeal to SCIT under s.99 ITA
  3. 3 Whether very exceptional circumstances exist to bypass the statutory appeal route

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time and leave for judicial review was dismissed because it was filed outside the mandatory three-month period without good reason to extend time, and the impugned DGIR and Minister decisions were not final or amenable to judicial review given the statutory appeal remedy to the Special Commissioners of Income Tax; accordingly the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the JR and ordered costs of RM5,000 to each respondent.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time and leave to commence judicial review dismissed for want of jurisdiction and prematurity.

Orders

  • Application for extension of time refused
  • Leave to commence judicial review refused/dismissed