Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Assessment of stamp duty

Legal area

Court

20 Dec 2019

LEE KOY ENG (NRIC No.: 550105-10-5586) PEMUNGUT DUTI SETEM

Citation

BA-14-1-03/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-14-1-03/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Forms 14A were instruments executed to give effect to beneficiaries' renunciation by operation of law and not inter vivos gifts because the beneficiaries held no proprietary interest prior to administration; therefore Item 66(c) (and Item 46) did not apply and the applicable stamp duty is Item 32(i) (nominal RM10); Collector's ad valorem assessment was erroneous and excess must be refunded with interest and costs.
31 Oct 2019

KU EK MEI (NO. K/P: 820118-01-6504) PEMUNGUT DUTI SETEM, UTC JOHOR BAHRU.

Citation

JA-24NCVC-723-12/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-24NCVC-723-12/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court preferred and upheld the JPPH valuations because JPPH applied the recognised comparison method using appropriate comparables and adjustments, the private valuer failed to produce reliable comparables or used incorrect data, and the Plaintiff failed to prove that JPPH wrongly exercised its discretion or acted beyond its powers; therefore the stamp duty assessments based on JPPH valuations were correct and the appeal was dismissed.