Lloyd v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2016] NSWCATAD 230

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Lloyd v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue [2016] NSWCATAD 230 Hearing dates: 16 September 2016 Date of orders: 12 October 2016 Decision date: 12 October 2016 Jurisdiction: Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division Before: S Frost, Senior Member Decision: (1) Land tax assessments for land tax years 2013, 2014 and 2015 confirmed. (2) No award of costs. Catchwords: REVENUE – land tax – principal place of residence – property not used and occupied by owner – concession for unoccupied property – conditions for exemption not met – exemption not available – land tax assessments confirmed Legislation Cited: Land Tax Management Act 1956 (NSW) Taxation Administration Act 1996 (NSW) Cases Cited: Cornish Investments Pty Ltd v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue (RD) [2013] NSWADTAP 25 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Jennifer Lloyd and Peter Lloyd (Applicants) Chief Commissioner of State Revenue (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: I Sethi (Respondent)

Solicitors: Jennifer Lloyd (Applicant in person) Crown Solicitor's Office (Respondent) File Number(s): 1610275

Reasons for decision

Introduction 1. The Applicants have been assessed to land tax on a property they bought in Balgowlah in October 2012. They claim the land tax assessments are wrong. The basis of that claim is that it is the only property they own in New South Wales (or indeed anywhere), and they plan to live there as their principal place of residence. 2. The Respondent, the Chief Commissioner, discovered that the property had been rented out for about 15 months in 2014 and 2015, and on that basis he concluded that whatever land tax exemption the Applicants might have assumed they were entitled to, was not available. That triggered the making of land tax assessments for the 2013, 2014 and 2015 land tax years. The Applicants objected against the assessments but the objections were disallowed. They have now sought review of the assessments in this Tribunal. 3. I have concluded that the assessments are correct, and must be confirmed. These are my reasons.