Answer To: BULAW5916 Taxation Law & Practice Assignment – Semester 1, 2020 Purpose The purpose of this...
Preeti answered on May 17 2021
Running Head: DISCUSSION
Income Tax Assessment
Question 1
Part 1:
Income tax consequences of ABC Ltd is to be determined on the basis whether amount of $million received from Indian Shipping company is a business income arising out of normal business transaction, or, it is a capital gain income subject to CGT (Capital Gain Tax). With reference to the given transaction, it is necessary to evaluate the provisions of Income Tax Assessment Act 1997.
Whether it is a business income or capital gain income, both provisions are evaluated upon. Prior to 1985, CGT in Australia applied only on the assets which are purchased or acquired on or after 20th September 1985, assets owned or before this cut-off date are termed as pre-CGT assets. And, assets acquired after this date, will be subject to CGT. In context to underlying case scenario, contract was signed on August 1, 1985; therefore the provision of CGT will not be applicable (Australian Government: Federal Register of Legislation, 2020).
Now, the question arises whether it is a business income or not, case law titled, ‘Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Slaven (1984) 1 FCR 11’ the main distinguishing factor in treating the compensation as an income depends upon the fact that it has been received as a compensation to replace lost income or compensation representing lost earning capacity (Australian Tax Casebook, 2011). In case of compensation received in lieu of loss of income, it will be considered as a business income, while receipt on account of lost earning capacity, it would be treated as capital transaction and out of preview of income tax.
Another case law, ‘Californian Oil Products Ltd. (in Liquidation) v. Federal Commissioner of Taxation, High Court of Australia, 24 August 1934’, Californian Oil Products Ltd was appointed as an exclusive agent for five years for the sale of petroleum products. Later on, agency agreement was terminated and the company received compensation for cancellation of its exclusive agency agreement. The question for deciding whether the compensation amount forms the part of assessable income of the Californian Oil Products Ltd is based on several facts. Firstly, it is concluded that the compensation do not form the part of assessable income as it is not of an income nature, neither it has attracted any of the specific provisions of the Income Tax Assessment Act (ITAA) for making it eligible for taxation. This compensation was paid for relinquishment of rights and complete abandonment of the only business activity or operation of the Californian Oil Products Ltd (CALIFORNIAN OIL PRODUCTS LTD. (in Liquidation) v. FEDERAL COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION, High Court of Australia, 24 August 1934).
Applying these rulings on the given case where ABC Ltd was deriving major portion of its business with Indian Shipping Company, accounts for more than 60% of its profits along with other minor activities related to shipping. The termination or cancellation hampers ABC Ltd’s earning capacity, secondly, the transaction bears the character of extraordinary in nature, constitute as one-of transaction, which hampers overall earning capacity of ABC Ltd. As stated in case facts, ABC Ltd is also conducting its minor activities related to shipping with Indian Shipping company, but, the termination of this agency agreement disrupted or negatively affected entire shipping operations of ABC Ltd, and, its future earning capacity. In light of all these facts, it can be argued that compensation receipt from Indian Shipping Company falls bears the character of capital nature, and, in the absence of any CGT provisions for the contract entered before 20th September 1985, it is out of the purview of assessable income (Australian Government: Federal Register of Legislation, 2020).
Part 2
As mentioned above, capital gain tax provisions are incorporated in the ITAA with effect from 20th September 1985, therefore, if the...