Perception of administration of justice is becoming a major concern...
Not paying TAXES - everyone has to pay a certain percentage of income(after permissible deductions) as income tax..
Malaysians have to pay about 24% of taxable income...
So, if Najib really has to pay taxes of RM1.6 billion, then his taxable income was about RM6.4 billion. (The High Court and the Court of Appeal decisions say so, and now Najib has appealed to the Federal Court - and a stay of execution of judgment has been granted until the Federal Court hears and decide on the appeal.)
On July 22 last year(2020), the High Court allowed the IRB's application for a summary judgment to be entered against Najib, 68, in its suit to recover RM1.69 billion in taxes from the latter for the period between 2011 and 2017.
Court of Appeal (Sept 9, 2021): Former premier Datuk Seri Najib Razak a his son Datuk Mohd Nazifuddin have failed in their appeal against a court decision to allow a summary judgment against them over unpaid taxes of RM1.69 billion and RM37.64 million respectively.
For a better understanding of Najib's tax case:-
July 2020 - High Court - summary judgment entered against Najib
September 2021 - Court of Appeal dismisses Najib's appeal. Grants an interim stay of today’s judgment pending further appeal at the Federal Courton the condition that the notice of appeal is filed at the apex court latest by next week.
21/10/2021 - Court of Appeal allowed a temporary stay of a judgment pending the hearing of their bid for leave to appeal in the Federal Court. [Before the appeal comes before the Federal Court, the appellant need to first get LEAVE of the Federal Court to appeal - and in the Najib's case, we are at this LEAVE stage - will the Federal Court grant Leave or Not, and if leave is granted, the the Federal Court will hear and decide on the appeal]
*** Noting the interim stay granted in September 2021, this new stay is not a big deal, and it is only until the hearing of the leave application - maybe later, another stay application may be needed if leave granted until Federal Court hears and decide on the appeal.
{Note all that has happened in court is based on media report, not after perusing the court judgments}
It is shameful when our leaders(Members of Cabinet/MPs/ADUNs) set a bad example by not declaring income or paying income tax...or paying taxes..
Now, if Najib had paid his taxes, then that RM1.69 billion could have been used by the government in their war against Covid-19
- That money could have even provided monthly minimum income for all those who lost their jobs/income
- It could have gone to buying need medical equipment...
When some of the RICH evade or delay payment of taxes, it puts our government in a difficult position - the government may have to apply for LOANs..
Remember Ahmad Maslan's charge was also about non-declaration to income tax...
In the case Ahmad Maslan, the first charge was money laundering by not declaring the RM2mil he allegedly received from former Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak when filing taxes for year 2013. He was charged - Ahmad Maslan's acquittal raises much concern - a MADPET statement
When caught, it is sad that some come up with excuses like 'oh...it was not for me, but for my political party...or some charity' - it is rather pathetic. If not caught, would they say the same???
The question is simply whether you received the monies - It matters not whether you spent it for yourself, gave some of the monies to charity, donated it to your political party, etc.. or even later returned the monies.
TAX EXEMPTION usually guaranteed to limited charities. I believe that there should be no 'tax exemption' for donation to political parties or politicians.
If someone want to make a donation to a political party or some charity - then, they will directly donate the money to that political party to its bank accounts...
It was sad that that Ahmad Maslan
Former deputy finance minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Maslan claims to have been victimised owing to lack of laws to regulate political funding, resulting in him being part of the "court cluster" following a money laundering charge.
Malaysia must work towards showing the world that Malaysian law and the administration of justice does not discriminate. Even Prime Ministers that break the law will be investigated and prosecuted.
Recent cases of mid-trial discontinuance, followed by ACQUITTALS is worrisome. Recent 'deals' with suspects and/or accused is also disconcerting. Offer of compounds for crimes like corruption and kleptocracy crimes also of concern.
See related posts:-
Ahmad Maslan's acquittal raises much concern - a MADPET statement
Ahmad Maslan can bravely admit to the crime, because an Acquital means he can never be charged again for the said offences again?
Public prosecutor must explain Ahmad Maslan’s acquittal, says group (Malaysian Insight)
29 Bribery Charges - mid-trial discontinuance and acquittal - Time to Abolish ACQUITAL safe for after trial/close of prosecution case?
AG/MACC must Apologize and Compensate Ehsanuddin after 29 Bribery Charge Withdrawn after 2 years - MADPET
Ehsanuddin(a former UMNO MP) - "repayment of monies = acquittal", loan not corrruption? OR incompetency/abuse of MACC/Prosecution?
Riza Aziz case, the AG's statement? Money recovered from Najib's and Rosmah's house belong to Riza?
Riza Aziz - Pay back 43%(US$108 million) of what he allegedly took? Compounded for what and how much- US$620 million? US270 million? Justice?
Najib, son allowed to defer payment of RM1.69bil and RM37.6mil in tax arrears
PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has allowed a temporary stay of a judgment which ordered Datuk Seri Najib Razak and his son Datuk Mohd Nazifuddin to pay RM1.69 billion and RM37.6 million respectively in tax arrears.
A three-man bench led by Datuk Azizah Nawawi unanimously allowed the father and son's application on grounds that there were special circumstances for a stay pending the hearing of their bid for leave to appeal in the Federal Court.
"We find that there are special circumstances that warrants us to exercise our discretion to allow an interim stay of the execution of summary judgment in both applications until the hearing of the leave application in the Federal Court," the judge said.
Judges Datuk M.Gunalan and Datuk Che Ruzima Ghazali also presided in the proceeding which was conducted via Zoom.
The High Court, earlier this year dismissed Najib and his son's bid to stay the summary judgement order obtained by the Inland Revenue Board (IRB) against them.
The IRB on Feb 4, issued bankruptcy notices against the duo following their failure to pay the sums.
Earlier, during submissions lawyer Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah who represented Najib and Nazifuddin argued that there were special circumstances for a stay to be granted.
He said there would be a trail of repercussions which are irreparable such as Najib losing his position as a Member of Parliament (MP) and will no longer be able to contest in any elections if he was declared a bankrupt.
He also argued that there was bad faith conducted on part of the government to declare Najib bankrupt as there were clear errors in the additional assessments.
He said the IRB had maliciously calculated as income the donations his client received from the late King Abdullah from Saudi Arabia which had been refunded, the interbank transfers within Najib's bank accounts and cancelled cheques, among others.
"This is rather a mala fide (bad faith) eagerness to declare my client bankrupt despite the obvious deformity of assessment," he said.
Shafee said Nazifuddin has been negotiating to settle the certain amount due and had paid RM30,000 in spite of his protest against the summary judgement order.
On the other hand, he said Najib is fighting against the order as none of the latter's tax were due, not a single cent.
"The accounting itself is totally flawed," Shafee added.
Meanwhile, senior revenue counsel Dr Hazlina Hussain who acted for IRB in objecting the stay application said the reasons stated by the lawyer were not special circumstances which warrants a stay.
She said the allegation that the IRB had acted in bad faith in the recovery action was unfounded.
On the contention involving the assessment, Hazlina said the matter must be decided by the Special Commissioner of Income Tax (SCIT) as it involves the merits of the assessment.
On July 22 last year, the High Court allowed the IRB's application for a summary judgment to be entered against Najib, 68, in its suit to recover RM1.69 billion in taxes from the latter for the period between 2011 and 2017.
Najib was ordered to pay the sum.
The government, through IRB, filed the suit against Najib on June 25, 2019, asking him to settle the unpaid tax with interest at 5 per cent, a year from the date of judgment, as well as costs and other relief deemed fit by the court.
On July 6 last year, the High Court ordered Nazifuddin, 38, to pay RM37,644,810.73 in unpaid taxes to the IRB.
This was after a summary judgment order was entered in the IRB's tax arrears suit seeking to recoup the unpaid amount from Nazifuddin between 2011 and 2017.
The suit was filed against him on July 24 last year.
On Feb 4, the board issued bankruptcy notices against the Pekan member of parliament and his son following their failure to pay the sums.- NST, 21/10/2021
Najib and son’s tax appeal dismissed by appellate court
PUTRAJAYA (Sept 9): Former premier Datuk Seri Najib Razak and his son Datuk Mohd Nazifuddin have failed in their appeal against a court decision to allow a summary judgment against them over unpaid taxes of RM1.69 billion and RM37.64 million respectively.
“We find no merit in these two appeals and no error in the judgment of the two High Court judges which should be corrected by this court.
“Thus both appeals are dismissed with costs of RM10,000 each,” said Court of Appeal judge Datuk Abdul Karim Abdul Jalil in a unanimous decision.
Shafee then asked the Court of Appeal for an interim stay of today’s judgment pending further appeal at the Federal Court.
After brief deliberations, Justice Abdul Karim allowed the stay application on the condition that the notice of appeal is filed at the apex court latest by next week.
In his submission during a virtual hearing today, Shafee argued that Section 106(3) of the Income Tax Act 1967 infringed upon Najib and Nazifuddin’s constitutional rights as it allowed IRB’s imposition of a summary judgment without hearing their defence.
He submitted that it violated his clients’ rights under Article 5 (touching on liberty of a person) and Article 8 (equal protection of the law) in relation to Article 121 (court’s power to hear an application) of the Federal Constitution.
Hazlina, however, argued that this is not the case, as the matter can be referred to the Special Commissioners of Income Tax, which the former premier and his son have already done.
Najib was watching the proceedings via Zoom.
The summary judgment was entered on the former premier by Justice Ahmad Bache on July 22 last year, where he is required to pay RM1.69 billion in income tax arrears.
Justice Ahmad on June 14 this year also dismissed Najib’s application for a stay in paying the amount.
The government through the IRB also filed bankruptcy proceedings against Najib at the High Court in April.
Another High Court judge, Datuk Ahmad Zaidi Ibrahim, on July 6 last year entered summary judgment on Nazifuddin, ordering him to pay RM37.64 million in unpaid taxes to the IRB for the period between 2011 and 2017.
In May this year, the IRB instituted bankruptcy proceedings against Nazifuddin.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment