PENANG DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v PEMUNGUT DUTI SETEM

01f-28-10-2023k Federal Court (Mahkamah Persekutuan) 16 September 2024 • 01(f)-28-10/2023(K)

Catchwords

remission of stamp duty for a loan without security condition precedent for state authority to be fully responsible for loan Incorporation (State Legislatures Competency) Act 1962 Penang Development Corporation Enactment 1971 Stamp Duty Act 1949 section 17A Interpretation Acts purpose and object of an Act importing definitions and provisions from other legislation

Practice Areas

remission of stamp duty for a loan without security condition precedent for state authority to be fully responsible for loan Incorporation (State Legislatures Competency) Act 1962 Penang Development Corporation Enactment 1971 Stamp Duty Act 1949 section 17A Interpretation Acts purpose and object of an Act importing definitions and provisions from other legislation

Judges (3)

Abdul Karim bin Abdul Jalil Coram Nallini Pathmanathan Delivered Rhodzariah binti Bujang Coram

Parties (2)

PENANG DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Appellant Pemungut Duti Setem Respondent

Case Significance

PENANG DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v PEMUNGUT DUTI SETEM is a Federal Court (Mahkamah Persekutuan) decision dated September 16, 2024 (citation: 01f-28-10-2023k). <p>The Penang Development Corporation appealed against the refusal of stamp duty remission for a loan facility, where the Revenue contended that a Letter of Undertaking from the State Government constituted security. The Federal Court held that the LOU was a statutory obligation under the Incorporation (State Legislatures Competency) Act 1962 and not security within the meaning of the Stamp Act, and that the term 'security' should be interpreted in accordance with the Stamp Act itself. The appea The panel comprised Abdul Karim bin Abdul Jalil, Nallini Pathmanathan and Rhodzariah binti Bujang, with Nallini Pathmanathan delivering the judgment.

Summary

The Penang Development Corporation appealed against the refusal of stamp duty remission for a loan facility, where the Revenue contended that a Letter of Undertaking from the State Government constituted security. The Federal Court held that the LOU was a statutory obligation under the Incorporation (State Legislatures Competency) Act 1962 and not security within the meaning of the Stamp Act, and that the term 'security' should be interpreted in accordance with the Stamp Act itself. The appeal was allowed with costs.

What was the outcome of PENANG DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v PEMUNGUT DUTI SETEM?

<p>The Penang Development Corporation appealed against the refusal of stamp duty remission for a loan facility, where the Revenue contended that a Let...