Find our top tasks, calculators and publications
Quickly pay your liability or fine
Register, manage and pay
Calculate your liability or grant amount
Search our publications, forms, rulings and documents
Our details if you need to reach us
Download information packs and register for upcoming events
Date of judgement | 29 March 2018 |
Proceeding number | 2016/377933 |
Judge(s) | NS Isenberg, Senior Member |
Court or Tribunal | New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal |
REVENUE LAW – Payroll Tax Act 2007 – Division 7 contractor provisions – grouping - payments to third persons - interest – penalties – evidence of reasonable care – credit of witnesses
B & L Linings Pty Ltd v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2008] NSWCA 187
B & L Linings Pty Ltd v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue (NSW) (No. 3) [2007] NSWADTAP 32
Boston Sales and Marketing Pty Limited v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2014] NSWCATAD 139
Bridges Financial Services Pty Ltd v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2005] NSWSC 788
Chief Commissioner of State Revenue v Paspaley [2008] NSWCA 184
Chief Commissioner of State Revenue v Smeaton Grange Holdings Pty Ltd [2017] NSWCA 184
Cornish Investments Pty Limited v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue (RD) [2013] NSWADTAP 25
Ferella & Anor v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2014] NSWCA 378
Re Zuccala Homes Pty Ltd and Commissioner of State Revenue (Victoria) (1994) 94 ATC 2084
Trust Co. of Australia Ltd -v- Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2002] NSWADT 21
Following an audit, the Chief Commissioner of State Revenue issued assessments on 28 November 2014 for the 2009 to 2014 financial years (Relevant Years). On 15 April 2015, Novus objected to the assessments. On 12 January 2016, the Chief Commissioner issued an Objection Determination, which partly allowed and partly disallowed the assessments. Replacement assessments were issued at that time (the Assessments). A review application was lodged with NCAT on 9 March 2016.
The assessed payroll tax fell into 2 categories:
The imposition of interest and penalty tax was also reviewed by the Tribunal.
Novus sought to rely on the “90 day exemption” provisions in s. 32(2)(b)(iii) and the “two-person exemption” in s. 32(2)(c), to argue that the arrangements were exempt from the relevant contracts provisions.
The Chief Commissioner argued that this case was relevantly indistinguishable from the circumstances outlined in Bridges Financial Services v Chief Commissioner (2006) 222 ALR 599 (Bridges), with respect to the relevant contracts issue.
The Assessments included 25% penalty tax and interest calculated at the market rate. Novus contended that no interest or penalties are payable [744] and, even if they are, the Chief Commissioner should remit all interest and penalties in full.
The Senior Member findings included:
The Senior Member findings included
The Tribunal found [788] that:
Novus Capital Ltd v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2018] NSWCATAD 72