RRG decision summaries
Regional Relocation Grant
2014 Decision Summary
|Steber v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue  NSWCATAD 135|
|Date of Decision: 09 September 2014
Decision: The Tribunal noted that the onus of proof is on the Taxpayers to establish the facts on which they rely under s.100(3) of the Taxation Administration Act 1996. (B & L Linings v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue  NSWCA 187 at ).
Senior Member Isenberg found that the Taxpayers did not comply with the eligibility criteria as set out in s15 of the RRG Act; the distance between the two properties is considerably less than 100km. In addition, sections 26 and 26A of the RRG Act do not provide the Chief Commissioner with any discretion to vary the distance requirement.
With respect to submissions of the Taxpayers as to general fairness and discrimination, the Tribunal stated that it would be unfair to grant an exception to the Taxpayers when other individuals did not receive the grant in similar circumstances. Senior Member Isenberg accepted the Chief Commissioner's submission that setting aside the Chief Commissioner's decision would result in a decision that did not comply with the law and would be incorrect.
The Tribunal found that the Taxpayers did not satisfy the onus of proving that the Chief Commissioner had discretion to allow the grant application.
Order: The decision under review is affirmed.
Catchwords: Regional relocation grant. Discretion of the Chief Commissioner. Distance requirement.
Case summary: Steber v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue  NSWCATAD 135
Last updated: 16 April 2015