Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Penalty under section 113(2)

Legal area

Court

11 Mar 2026

TAN IT MING KETUA PENGARAH HASIL DALAM NEGERI

Citation

WA-14-3-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-14-3-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court found that, taken in context of the parties' correspondence and the trial events, the Respondent's withdrawal of concession letters and the amendment of the Issues To Be Tried on the trial day materially prejudiced the Appellants' ability to adduce evidence and call witnesses, thereby curtailing their right to a fair hearing; accordingly the appropriate remedy under paragraph 39(b) Schedule 5 ITA 1967 is to remit the matter to the Special Commissioners for rehearing.
1 Jan 1900

1. ) MOHD ZAINURI BIN MOHD IDRUS 2. ) KETUA PENGARAH HASIL DALAM NEGERI 1. ) KETUA PENGARAH HASIL DALAM NEGERI 2. ) MOHD ZAINURI BIN MOHD IDRUS

Citation

WA-14-3-03/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-14-3-03/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court upheld SCIT's factual conclusion that the payment was made to settle disputes and not a bona fide ordinary share sale, validating DGIR's use of s140(1)(a) to treat the RM30,000,000 as taxable settlement gains under s4(f); the imposition of penalty under s113(2) was a lawful exercise of discretion; however SCIT lacked jurisdiction to declare the additional assessment null and void for noncompliance with s140(5), and failure to include particulars does not automatically invalidate an assessment—the appropriate remedy is to seek relief in the High Court.