Alesco New Zealand Limited and others v Commissioner of Inland Revenue - SC 33/2013
Summary
Income Tax Acts 1994 and 2004 – Tax Administration Act 1994 - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the applicant’s funding transactions were “tax avoidance arrangements” in terms of the Income Tax Acts 1994 and 2004 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the respondent’s tax reassessments of the applicant – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in deciding that the respondent’s reassessments in respect of the applicant were not in excess of the respondent’s powers under the Income Tax Acts 1994 and 2004 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the applicant took an unacceptable tax position in terms of s 141B of the Tax Administration Act 1994 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding the applicant liable for penalties under s 141D of the Tax Administration Act 1994 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the respondent was entitled to costs.[2013] NZCA 40 CA 53/2012
Additional Information
14 February 2014.
A Leave to appeal is granted.
B The approved grounds of appeal are whether, in light of the principles laid down by this Court in Ben Nevis Forestry Ventures Ltd v Commissioner of Inland Revenue and other cases on tax avoidance:
(i) the structure used by the applicants for funding the transactions is a tax avoidance arrangement;
(ii) the Commissioner’s application of shortfall penalties was a proper exercise of the relevant statutory powers;
(iii) the Commissioner’ s reassessments were a proper exercise of the relevant statutory powers.
9 July 2013.