Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Malaysia Case Law

Tax evasion

  • 29 Dec 2022

    AHMAD ZAWAWI BIN ABDUL RAHIM

    Citation
    AA-42GS-6-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    AA-42GS-6-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The High Court found the prosecution proved that the appellant submitted false GST‑03 statements which produced unjustified input tax credits and refunds; section 89(6) GST Act presumption applied and the appellant failed to rebut it on the balance of probabilities; procedural irregularity in the Sessions Court's reliance on section 180 CPC did not vitiate the trial; accordingly convictions were safe and sentences of three years per count (to run concurrently) were lawful; applications for repayment under section 122 failed for lack of Director General's certificate and stay of execution was…

  • 29 Dec 2022

    AHMAD ZAWAWI BIN ABDUL RAHIM

    Citation
    AA-42GS-7-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    AA-42GS-7-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The High Court affirmed the Sessions Court: the seven refunds constituted evasion under the GST Act; s89(6) presumption applied and the appellant failed to rebut it on the balance of probabilities; failure to call material witnesses justified adverse inference; procedural reliance on s180 CPC was irregular but not fatal; sentences of three years per count were lawful and to run concurrently; application for repayment under s122 failed for lack of Director General's certificate; application for stay was dismissed for absence of special/exceptional circumstances.

  • 29 Dec 2022

    AHMAD ZAWAWI BIN ABDUL RAHIM

    Citation
    AA-42GS-5-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    AA-42GS-5-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The High Court upheld the Sessions Court's findings: appellant obtained refundable input tax by false GST-03 entries and the presumption in s89(6) GST Act applied; appellant failed to rebut that presumption on the balance of probabilities, the convictions and three-year sentences per count were lawful and to run concurrently, and there were no special grounds to stay execution or to order repayment under s122 without the Director General's certificate.