What is LHDN’s case for refusing a stay of proceedings?

Question

Accepted Answer

LHDN says there are no special circumstances to justify staying its proceedings
LHDN argues there are no special circumstances that warrant a stay of proceedings in its case against former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak. Its position is grounded in the “pay first, talk later” principle, which requires tax assessments to be settled even when appeals are still pending. LHDN is represented by senior revenue counsel Norhisham Ahmad.
LHDN’s core argument is the absence of special circumstances
LHDN, through Norhisham Ahmad, maintained that a stay should not be granted because there are no special circumstances in the matter. The court heard that this stance is aimed at allowing the LHDN case to proceed rather than pausing it while related tax challenges continue.
The Federal Court ruling from October 2023 supports “pay first, talk later”
LHDN relied on a Federal Court ruling from October 2023 that upheld the “pay first, talk later” principle. Under that principle, tax assessments must be settled regardless of any pending appeals. In this setting, LHDN’s position is that Najib’s ongoing challenges cannot stop the recovery process tied to the assessments.
The assessments must be settled even while appeals are ongoing
LHDN’s case is that the existence of pending appeals does not shield a taxpayer from enforcement actions connected to tax assessments. The “pay first, talk later” approach is described as requiring assessments to be dealt with immediately, rather than waiting for appellate outcomes. This is the basis for opposing a stay in the proceedings before the Special Commissioners of Income Tax (SCIT) in September.
The hearing is set against a backdrop of earlier court decisions
The Court of Appeal hearing follows a November 17 ruling in which the High Court dismissed applications by Najib and his son, Nazifuddin, to stay bankruptcy proceedings. That earlier decision affirmed that pending appeals do not protect taxpayers from recovery actions tied to unpaid tax arrears, including RM1.69 billion for 2011 to 2017 and RM37.6 million for Nazifuddin. The Court of Appeal has set September 4 for its decision.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

What is LHDN’s case for refusing a stay of proceedings?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

2

0

0

Share with friends