River Estates Sdn Bhd
www.ipsofactoJ.com/archive/index.htm [1983] Part 2 Case 5 [PC] | |
| THE PRIVY COUNCIL | River Estates Sdn Bhd
- vs -
The Director General of Inland Revenue CoramLORD SCARMAN LORD ROSKILL LORD BRIDGE OF HARWICH LORD BRIGHTMAN SIR DENYS BUCKLEY | 5 DECEMBER 1983 |
Judgment
Lord Scarman
(delivering the Judgment of the Board) 1. Ever since its incorporation in 1950 River Estates Sdn Bhd the appellant, has been engaged commercially in the extraction of timber and in plantation in north-east Borneo. On 15 December 1973 the Director-General of Inland Revenue (“the Revenue”) served upon the appellant notices of additional assessment to income tax for the years of assessment 1968–72. The assessments were:— 1968 .... .... .... .... | $ 431,112 | 1969 .... .... .... .... | 356,253 | 1970 .... .... .... .... | 1,019,229 | 1971 .... .... .... .... | 90,790 | 1972 .... .... .... .... | 67,202 | 2. The appellant appealed against the assessments. The appeal was dismissed by the Special Commissioners of Income Tax, by the High Court, and by the Federal Court. The case now comes before your Lordships’ Board with the leave of the Federal Court. 3. The assessments arise from the refusal of the Revenue to accept that during the relevant period the appellant was entitled to set off capital allowances in respect of qualifying plantation expenditure against income derived from its timber operations. It is the Revenue’s submission that in the circumstances of this case the plantation allowances are available only against income derived from the appellant’s plantation operations. The case turns on whether during the relevant period (i.e. the basis periods of the years of assessment) the appellant carried on one single business of which timber extraction and plantation were integral parts, or whether it carried on more than one business. It was, and remains, the Revenue submission that
| THE PRIVY COUNCIL | River Estates Sdn Bhd
- vs -
The Director General of Inland Revenue CoramLORD SCARMAN LORD ROSKILL LORD BRIDGE OF HARWICH LORD BRIGHTMAN SIR DENYS BUCKLEY | 5 DECEMBER 1983 |
Judgment
Lord Scarman
(delivering the Judgment of the Board) 1. Ever since its incorporation in 1950 River Estates Sdn Bhd the appellant, has been engaged commercially in the extraction of timber and in plantation in north-east Borneo. On 15 December 1973 the Director-General of Inland Revenue (“the Revenue”) served upon the appellant notices of additional assessment to income tax for the years of assessment 1968–72. The assessments were:— 1968 .... .... .... .... | $ 431,112 | 1969 .... .... .... .... | 356,253 | 1970 .... .... .... .... | 1,019,229 | 1971 .... .... .... .... | 90,790 | 1972 .... .... .... .... | 67,202 | 2. The appellant appealed against the assessments. The appeal was dismissed by the Special Commissioners of Income Tax, by the High Court, and by the Federal Court. The case now comes before your Lordships’ Board with the leave of the Federal Court. 3. The assessments arise from the refusal of the Revenue to accept that during the relevant period the appellant was entitled to set off capital allowances in respect of qualifying plantation expenditure against income derived from its timber operations. It is the Revenue’s submission that in the circumstances of this case the plantation allowances are available only against income derived from the appellant’s plantation operations. The case turns on whether during the relevant period (i.e. the basis periods of the years of assessment) the appellant carried on one single business of which timber extraction and plantation were integral parts, or whether it carried on more than one business. It was, and remains, the Revenue submission that