FC of T v RYAN

Members: Gleeson CJ
Gummow J
Kirby J
Hayne J

Callinan J

Tribunal:
High Court

MEDIA NEUTRAL CITATION: [2000] HCA 4

Decision date: Judgment delivered 3 February 2000

---

Callinan J

86. I agree with the reasons and conclusion of Gleeson CJ, Gummow and Hayne JJ and would join in the orders proposed. I would however add these observations.

87. Spender J was correct to hold that the ``number zero is the beginning of and hence the first number of, and included in, the domain of natural numbers... In the domain of the integers, the number line unarguably contains zero. That is, zero is a number, sum or amount''. ^[94] Ryan v FC of T 97 ATC 4645 at 4654; (1997) 148 ALR 88 at 98.

88. In the face of that, the repeated use of the word ``assessment'' <sup>[95]</sup> eg ``Details of your assessment''; ``Dissatisfied with your assessment. If you are not satisfied that your assessment is correct ... you can object to your assessment''. in the document entitled ``Refund Notice'' which was sent to the respondent on 11 December 1987, the interval of more than six years that elapsed before a Notice of Assessment issued in respect of the year ending 1987, and the familiar, indeed almost invariable contemporary practice of large corporations of issuing invoices and statements of account generated by electronic devices, and often indicating a nil or negative liability or balance, it is not at all surprising that the respondent (as would most people unacquainted with Batagol's Case ^[96] Batagol v FC of T (1963) 13 ATD 202; (1963) 109 CLR 243. ) would regard herself as having complied with the requirements of an assessment and as having fully acquitted her liability for tax. But the Act ^[97] Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cth). is concerned with the statutory imposition of taxation and its collection. That it is so concerned should not however preclude the appellant from making it unmistakably clear on relevant documents what is, and what is not an assessment or a Notice thereof.

ORDER

1. Appeal allowed.

2. Set aside par 1 of the order of the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia entered on 30 April 1999 and in lieu order:

• (a) appeal allowed;
• (b) set aside pars 1, 2 and 3 of the order of Spender J entered on 15 September 1997 and in lieu order that the appeal is dismissed.