Koitaki Para Rubber Estates Limited v Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1940] HCA 33

ito

O41 0LR.) OF AUSTRALIA. 1

$C: alfred ord he DL

[HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.)

KOITAKI PARA RUBBER ESTATES LIMITED Appetianr ;

AND

THE FEDERAL COMMISSIONER OF TAXA- \ Ee ae ee ESPONDENT.

Income Tax (Cth.)—Company—Assessable income—Exemption—Rubber produced in \. C, ov A. Papua—Sale in Australia—Proceeds—" Produce of a territory of which he isa 1940, resident" —Plantation owned by company incorporated in Australia—Residence mayo —MDest—Central management and control—Income Tax Assessment Act 1936- SYDNEY, 1937 (No. 27 of 1936—No. 18 of 1937), sec. 23 (n). Sept. 115

q Now. 26. Although a registered company may have more than one residence for the

purpose of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936-1937, a finding that a company Dixon J. is a resident of more than one country ought not to be made unless the control

of the general affairs of the company is not centred in one country but is

divided or distributed among two or more countries. The matter must always

'be one of degree, and residence may be constituted by a combination of various

factors, but one factor to be looked for is the existence in the place claimed

'as residence of the superior or directing authority by means of which the

affairs of the company are controlled.

Held, on the facts, that a company incorporated in New South Wales and having the central control, management and trading there, which owned rubber plantations in Papua which were managed by an officer of the company, 'was not also resident in Papua so as to be entitled to claim an exemption under sec, 23 (n) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936-1937 of so much of its income as was derived by it from the sale in Australia of the rubber produced in Papua.

APPEAL.

The Koitaki Para Rubber Estates Ltd., a company incorporated in New South Wales, owned rubber plantations in Papua. The rubber grown thereon was sold in Australia. The Federal Com- missioner of Taxation, for the purpose of calculating the com- pany's assessable income, took into account the proceeds of such