SERBA WANGI (PG) SDN BHD v KETUA PENGARAH HASIL DALAM NEGERI MALAYSIA

pa-14-1-03-2021 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 24 November 2024 • PA-14-1-03/2021 • 33 min read
16 cases cited (0 SG, 16 foreign)

Outcome

CONCLUSION [70] For the reasons stated above, I allow the Appellant’s appeal, set aside the SCIT’s Deciding Order dated 27.3.2018, and discharge the IRB’s (Respondent’s) assessments concerned, with costs of RM15K to be paid by the IRB (Respondent) to the Appellant. [71] I also order the penalty amounts of RM21,012.24 for YA 2007, and RM542,505.26 for YA 2008, which were already paid over by the Appellant to the IRB (Respondent), to be returned by the IRB (Respondent) to the Appellant.

Quoted verbatim from the judgment of High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) (pa-14-1-03-2021). Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal for the complete decision.

Catchwords

1. Under the Income Tax Act 1967 (ITA), the Appellant applied for a reinvestment allowance (RA). The Appellant is a Malaysian company-taxpayer. Where a Malaysian company-taxpayer has spent money to enhance its business in the activity of processing its product, it is entitled to be given an RA. The RA is 60% of the money spent for this purpose. 2. The Respondent (IRB) refused the Appellant’s claim for an RA. The Appellant appealed to the Special Commissioners Of Income Tax (SCIT). The SCIT dismissed the Appellant’s appeal. The Appellant appeals to the High Court. 3. Should the Appellant’s appeal be allowed i.e. it should be given the RA it has asked for? Or should the Appellant’s appeal be dismissed i.e. it should not be given the RA?

Practice Areas

Revenue Law

Judges (1)

Kenneth Yoong Ken Chinson St James Delivered

Counsel (6)

Cheang & Ariff Firm Lembaga Hasil Dalam Negeri Firm Ariffuddin Shahrulzani Counsel Respondent Cindy Goh Counsel Appellant Loh Heng Yeong Counsel Appellant Siti Salina Hassan Counsel Respondent

Parties (2)

KETUA PENGARAH HASIL DALAM NEGERI MALAYSIA Respondent SERBA WANGI Sdn Bhd Appellant

Statutes Cited

Income Tax Act 1967 (Cap 53)

Cases Cited (16)

UK (2)
[1955] 3 All ER 48 [1956] AC 14
MY (14)
[1982] 1 MLJ 235 [1984] 1 CLJ 108 [1984] 1 MLJ 248 [2004] 2 CLJ 265 [2005] 3 MLJ 97 [2021] 5 AMR 234 [2021] 5 CLJ 86 [2021] 9 MLJ 870 [2022] 5 MLRH 47 [2022] 7 CLJ 285 [2022] AMEJ 0211 [2022] MLJU 396 [2024] 8 CLJ 301 [2024] MLJU 1039

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (pa-14-1-03-2021)