Milne v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation.
Members: Barwick CJMcTiernan J
Gibbs J
Stephen J
Murphy J
Tribunal:
Full High Court
Murphy J.:
I will not repeat the facts. Although there are some differences, the facts are sufficiently close to those in
Clowes
&
Anor.
v.
F.C. of T.
(1954) 91 C.L.R. 209
that this case should not be distinguished from it. In
Clowes' case
this Court was evenly divided, the opinion of
Dixon
C.J. and
Kitto
J. prevailing by virtue of sec. 23(2) of the
Judiciary Act
1903-1973 over the dissent of
Webb
and
Taylor
JJ. That decision has stood for more than 20 years. Parliament has not seen fit to alter the
Income Tax Assessment Act
1936 (as amended) in such a way as to overcome the effect of that judgment. I see no reason to depart from
Clowes' case
.
It follows that the questions in the stated case should be answered:
- 1. No.
- 2. Yes.
- 3. No.
- 4. Yes.
ORDER:
The questions asked in the case stated are answered as follows:
- 1. Are the amounts received by the appellant during the year ended the 30th June 1973 from the forest company with respect to the bond and covenant or either of them held by the appellant income in the hands of the appellant and therefore assessable against the appellant under sec.
ATC 4007
25 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (as amended)?- Answer: No.
- 2. Are the amounts received by the appellant during the year ending 30th June 1973 from the forest company with respect to the bond and covenant or either of them held by the appellant not income in the hands of the appellant and therefore not assessable against the appellant under sec. 25 of the said Act?
- Answer: Yes.
- 3. Are the said amounts or either of them assessable income in the hands of the appellant being profits arising from the carrying on or carrying out of a profit-making undertaking or scheme under sec. 26(a) of the said Act?
- Answer: No.
- 4. Are the said amounts or either of them not assessable income in the hands of the appellant not being profits arising from the carrying on or carrying out of a profit-making undertaking or scheme under sec. 26(a) of the said Act?
- Answer: Yes.
Remit case to the Supreme Court of South Australia for determination in accordance with the answers given.
Commissioner to pay appellant's costs of the case stated.
Disclaimer and notice of copyright applicable to materials provided by CCH Australia Limited
CCH Australia Limited ("CCH") believes that all information which it has provided in this site is accurate and reliable, but gives no warranty of accuracy or reliability of such information to the reader or any third party. The information provided by CCH is not legal or professional advice. To the extent permitted by law, no responsibility for damages or loss arising in any way out of or in connection with or incidental to any errors or omissions in any information provided is accepted by CCH or by persons involved in the preparation and provision of the information, whether arising from negligence or otherwise, from the use of or results obtained from information supplied by CCH.
The information provided by CCH includes history notes and other value-added features which are subject to CCH copyright. No CCH material may be copied, reproduced, republished, uploaded, posted, transmitted, or distributed in any way, except that you may download one copy for your personal use only, provided you keep intact all copyright and other proprietary notices. In particular, the reproduction of any part of the information for sale or incorporation in any product intended for sale is prohibited without CCH's prior consent.
