[1968] HCA 91

High Court of Australia Taylor J. Barwick C.J. McTiernan, Kitto and Menzies JJ.

ORDER Appeals allowed with costs. Assessments set aside. Appeals allowed with costs. Assessments set aside. Appeals allowed with costs. In matters numbered 100-109 of 1966 vary orders appealed from by vacating so much of each order as sets aside an assessment and make in lieu thereof the following declaration and order:

(a) Declare that in respect of the whole of the contributions made by the appellant in the relevant year of income to the fund referred to in the notice of cross appeal as the Marine Plastics Superannuation Fund, whether to the "A" section or the "B" section thereof, an amount ascertained in accordance with s. 66 of the Income Tax and Social Services Contribution Assessment Act 1936, as amended, was an allowable deduction in the assessment of the tax payable by the appellant upon income derived in the said year of income; and

(b) Order that the assessment be remitted to the Commissioner of Taxation to be reduced by treating the amount so ascertained as an allowable deduction.

In matters numbered 110-113 of 1966 vary the orders appealed from by adding in each case a declaration that the income of the whole of the fund known as the Marine Plastics Superannuation Fund was in the relevant year of income exempt from income tax by virtue of s. 23 (j) of the Income Tax and Social Services Contribution Assessment Act 1936, as amended. Cross appeals dismissed with costs.

Cur. adv. vult.

1966, Oct. 13 Taylor J . delivered the following written judgments:—

Driclad Pty. Limited v. Commissioner of Taxation (Cth).

This is an appeal against an assessment to income tax in respect of income derived during the year ended 30th June 1958, by which the respondent disallowed as a deduction an amount of £1,500 claimed under the provisions of s. 66 of the Income Tax and Social Services Contribution Assessment Act 1936-1957 Cth. The amount in question appears in the company's accounts as a payment made on account of "Superannuation Fund Contribution". Upon the conclusion of the hearing of this appeal four other appeals relating to assessments for each of the four succeeding years came on for hearing together and each of these appeals raises a like question. It was agreed that the evidence taken in the first appeal, as far as it is relevant, should be evidence in the other four appeals and that the evidence taken on the hearing of those appeals should also, as far as it is relevant, be evidence in the first appeal. It is, therefore, convenient to deal with all five appeals together.