WR Carpenter Holdings Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation

PDF
Word
Highlights
Notes
Overview Full Text
Details
Case Agency Issuance Number Published Date

WR Carpenter Holdings Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation

[2008] HCA 33

Tags

No tags available

Case

WR Carpenter Holdings Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation

[2008] HCA 33

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGLEESON CJ,GUMMOW, KIRBY, HAYNE, HEYDON, CRENNAN AND KIEFEL JJMatter No S652/2007W.R. CARPENTER HOLDINGS PTY LIMITED  APPELLANTANDCOMMISSIONER OF TAXATION RESPONDENTMatter No S653/2007W.R. CARPENTER AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED  APPELLANTANDCOMMISSIONER OF TAXATION RESPONDENTW.R. Carpenter Holdings Pty Limited v Commissioner of TaxationW.R. Carpenter Australia Pty Limited v Commissioner of Taxation[2008] HCA 3331 July 2008S652/2007 & S653/2007ORDER1.In matter S652/2007, the record in this Court be amended to show W.R. Carpenter Holdings Pty Limited alone as appellant.2.In matter S653/2007, the record in this Court be amended to show W.R. Carpenter Australia Pty Limited alone as appellant.3.In each matter, appeal dismissed with costs.On appeal from the Federal Court of AustraliaRepresentationJ W Durack SC with J H Momsen and R L Seiden for the appellants (instructed by Becwell Legal Services Pty Limited)A Robertson SC with J W de Wijn QC and S H Steward for the respondent (instructed by Australian Government Solicitor)Notice:  This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSW.R. Carpenter Holdings Pty Limited v Commissioner of TaxationW.R. Carpenter Australia Pty Limited v Commissioner of TaxationIncome tax – International agreements – Dealings between parties not at "arm's length" – Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cth), s 136AD(1) deemed consideration equal to "arm's length consideration" to be received or receivable by taxpayer in certain circumstances if respondent Commissioner determined sub-section should apply – Commissioner determined s 136AD(1) should apply to appellant taxpayers and included "deemed" interest in assessable income – Whether Commissioner obliged to...

Continue reading the full case

Case content preview

Tags

No tags available

Case

WR Carpenter Holdings Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation

[2008] HCA 33

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGLEESON CJ,GUMMOW, KIRBY, HAYNE, HEYDON, CRENNAN AND KIEFEL JJMatter No S652/2007W.R. CARPENTER HOLDINGS PTY LIMITED  APPELLANTANDCOMMISSIONER OF TAXATION RESPONDENTMatter No S653/2007W.R. CARPENTER AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED  APPELLANTANDCOMMISSIONER OF TAXATION RESPONDENTW.R. Carpenter Holdings Pty Limited v Commissioner of TaxationW.R. Carpenter Australia Pty Limited v Commissioner of Taxation[2008] HCA 3331 July 2008S652/2007 & S653/2007ORDER1.In matter S652/2007, the record in this Court be amended to show W.R. Carpenter Holdings Pty Limited alone as appellant.2.In matter S653/2007, the record in this Court be amended to show W.R. Carpenter Australia Pty Limited alone as appellant.3.In each matter, appeal dismissed with costs.On appeal from the Federal Court of AustraliaRepresentationJ W Durack SC with J H Momsen and R L Seiden for the appellants (instructed by Becwell Legal Services Pty Limited)A Robertson SC with J W de Wijn QC and S H Steward for the respondent (instructed by Australian Government Solicitor)Notice:  This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSW.R. Carpenter Holdings Pty Limited v Commissioner of TaxationW.R. Carpenter Australia Pty Limited v Commissioner of TaxationIncome tax – International agreements – Dealings between parties not at "arm's length" – Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cth), s 136AD(1) deemed consideration equal to "arm's length consideration" to be received or receivable by taxpayer in certain circumstances if respondent Commissioner determined sub-section should apply – Commissioner determined s 136AD(1) should apply to appellant taxpayers and included "deemed" interest in assessable income – Whether Commissioner obliged to...