A T O homeNavigation menuContentRight Menu
Legal Database
Search   
for 
 
Access the database 
Browse database
Searches  
View last document
Quick access 
View legislation
View a document
Email Cross Reference Material Previous/Next Section Contents Previous/Next Result

Printable
version

Decision Impact Statement

Aitken v C of T; Langford v C of T


Court Citation(s):
[2009] AATA 83
2009 ATC 10-077
74 ATR 958

Venue: Administrative Appeals Tribunal
Venue Reference No: QT2005/52; QT2007/15
Judge Name: SM McCabe
Judgment date: 10 February 2009
Appeals on foot:
No

Administrative Treatment (Implication on current Public Rulings and Determinations)

Relevant Rulings/Determinations:

  • None
  • Subject References:
    Taxation
    Assessable income
    Dividends
    Burden of proof

    Précis

    The Tax Office's response to these cases which concerned whether amounts paid to shareholders of a company, being the proceeds from the sale of company assets and paid to the shareholders by the purchaser, are dividends assessable under s. 44 ITAA 1936

    Decision Outcome

    Adverse

    Brief Summary of Facts

    The applicants were directors and shareholders of an Australian resident company which conducted timber logging operations in Papua New Guinea (PNG) from 1989 to 1995. Initially the company carried out operations on its own behalf, but by 1995 the company had ceased its own logging operations and its major activity was the management of the PNG logging operations of a second company of which it was a 40% shareholder.

    In the 1995 financial year, the company terminated its management agreement with the second company and sold its 40% shareholding to a third party for approximately US$1.2 million, effectively ceasing its business operations in PNG.

    Pursuant to the sale contract, the proceeds of the sale were to be paid directly to Mr Langford and Mr Aitken by way of their solicitor in Singapore. That is, the sale proceeds were to be paid to the shareholders rather than the company. The Tribunal found that the consideration was received by the applicants under an implied trust, with the funds in question being held and used by the applicants for the benefit of the company (to pay out accruing liabilities of the company, etc).

    Issues decided by the Court or Tribunal

    The Tribunal found that the receipts in question were the beneficial property of the company, rather than the applicants and were accordingly not dividends assessable under section 44 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 .

    Tax Office view of Decision

    The Tribunal found the payments to the applicants were held by them on trust and used for the benefit of the company. This finding of fact was based on oral evidence which was neither supported by, nor inconsistent with, the documentary evidence. It was a finding of fact open on the evidence. The Tribunal's decision accordingly does not disclose an error of law.

    Administrative Treatment

    Implications on current Public Rulings & Determinations

    Nil

    Implications on Law Administration Practice Statements

    Nil

    Your comments

    We invite you to advise us if you feel this decision has consequences we have not identified, or if a precedential decision such as a Public Ruling or an ATO ID requires reconsideration or amendment. Please forward your comments to the contact officer by the due date.

    Date Issued: 4 August 2009
    Due Date: 29 September 2009
    Contact officer: Grahame Tanna, Assistant Commissioner
    Email address: grahame.tanna@ato.gov.au
    Telephone: (02) 9374 2674
    Facsimile: (02) 9374 2002
    Address: Australian Taxation Office,
    52 Goulburn Street,
    Sydney NSW 2000

    Legislative References:
    Income Tax Assessment Act 1936
    Section 44

     


    Top of page
    More information on page