Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Commissioner of Taxation v Rigoli [2013] FCA 784 Citation: Commissioner of Taxation v Rigoli [2013] FCA 784
Appeal from: Rigoli and Commissioner of Taxation [2012] AATA 757
Parties: THE COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA v LITTLE JOE RIGOLI
File number(s): VID 946 of 2012
Judge(s): PAGONE J
Date of judgment: 7 August 2013
Catchwords: INCOME TAX – appeal from the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – objection decisions – whether the taxpayer discharged the burden of proving assessments under s 167 were excessive – taxpayer does not discharge burden of proof by merely challenging the basis upon which the assessment was based – "concessions" by the taxpayer does not amount to probative evidence to discharge the burden of proof – burden of proof to be discharged by proving "actual taxable income" to establish excessiveness of assessment under s 167 – difference between assessment under ss 166 and 167 – Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 – ss 166, 167.
Legislation: Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (Cth) ss 92, 166, 167, 177(1) Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth) s 14ZZK
Cases cited: Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Dalco (1990) 168 CLR 614 Gashi v Commissioner of Taxation [2013] FCAFC 30 George v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1952) 86 CLR 183 Trautwein v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1936) 56 CLR 63
Date of hearing: 27 June 2013
Date of last submissions: 27 June 2013
Place: Melbourne
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate