8 Jun 2007
COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE V THOMPSON HC WN CIV 2005-485-799
- Citation
- openlaw-7dd39985_a9f6_448b_b604_5082cb9db2c2.pdf
- Court
- High Court
s14 is facilitative not mandatory; because the NOPA expressly designated a different agent the Commissioner could not rely on service to Mr Rae under s14's agency deeming and thus had to prove actual receipt within the response period; evidence that Mr Rae delivered and tabled the NOR at a meeting with Mr Thompson and his solicitor was not protected by legal advice privilege and was admissible to prove receipt; on the substantive GST issue the Commissioner's appeal is allowed following Lopas v CIR.