Bitomsky v Commissioner of Taxation [2013] FCA 589

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Bitomsky v Commissioner of Taxation [2013] FCA 589 Citation: Bitomsky v Commissioner of Taxation [2013] FCA 589

Parties: GREGORY BITOMSKY v COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION

File number: QUD 791 of 2012

Judge: REEVES J

Date of judgment: 16 May 2013

Date of hearing: 16 May 2013

Place: Brisbane

Division: GENERAL DIVISION

Category: No Catchwords

Number of paragraphs: 24

Counsel for the Applicant: P Bickford

Solicitor for the Applicant: McCullough Robertson

Solicitor for the Respondent: L Amundsen of Australian Government Solicitor

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION QUD 791 of 2012

BETWEEN: GREGORY BITOMSKY

Applicant

AND: COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION

Respondent

JUDGE: REEVES J DATE OF ORDER: 16 MAY 2013 WHERE MADE: BRISBANE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The application filed 19 April 2013 be dismissed. 2. The costs of this application be reserved. Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION QUD 791 of 2012

BETWEEN: GREGORY BITOMSKY

Applicant

AND: COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION

Respondent

JUDGE: REEVES J DATE: 16 MAY 2013 PLACE: BRISBANE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT (Corrected from transcript) 1 Mr Gregory Bitomsky, the applicant, filed an interlocutory application on 19 April 2013 seeking two categories of orders: (a) one preventing the Commissioner of Taxation, the respondent, from relying on affidavits or parts of affidavits that have been filed or that the Commissioner intends to file (the evidentiary issue); and (b) the other to require the Commissioner to file an amended points of defence (the pleadings issue). 2 Both the Commissioner and Mr Bitomsky have outlined their position in relation to each of these categories of orders in correspondence annexed to the affidavit of Mr Bitomsky's solicitor, filed in support of his application.