Edgar Joseph Jr SCJ:

[1] This was an appeal by the Government of Malaysia ("the Revenue") from an order of the High Court of Tawau, Sarawak, (Mr Justice Ian Chin) extending an order of stay of execution in respect of an order for summary judgment under O 14, obtained against the taxpayer Jasanusa Sdn Bhd ("the taxpayer") on 2 March 1993, pursuant to two notices of assessment, both dated 4 January 1990 in respect of the years of assessment 1984 and 1986, demanding payment of the sums of RM3,183,717.50 and RM2,492,609.85, respectively.

[2] The background facts may be taken in substance, from the judgment of the learned Judge where they have been set out with admirable clarity and detail.

[3] By a letter dated 15 November 1990, from the Revenue to the taxpayer's agents, the revenue had requested from the taxpayer the following material:

(1) a list of the vehicles, their registration numbers, chassis numbers, types, engine power, costs, dates of purchase, dates of sales, the names, identity card numbers and addresses of the purchasers and the sale

(2) a letter from the Road Transport Department certifying the vehicles to have been registered in the taxpayer's name; and

(3) copies of the hire-purchase/leasing agreements.

[4] In response to this request, the taxpayer's agents, had by letter dated 26 March 1991, supplied to the Revenue letters of the Forestry Department, documents of the Road Transport Department and lists relating to the ownership, registration numbers, chassis numbers and engine horse powers of some 48 vehicles. This letter ended with the following para:

Since the vehicles were sold many years ago, our client could not obtain any vehicle registration card or letters from the Forestry Department or JKJR to substantiate their ownership over the rest of the vehicles. However, efforts are being made to obtain confirmation letters from the relevant buyers and these will be forwarded to you if any are received.

Based on documents now enclosed, we shall be pleased if you could finalise our client's tax affairs for assessment years 1984 and 1986 as soon as possible.

[5] On 17 February 1992 the taxpayer had lodged Form Q with the revenue which evoked the following response from the revenue by letter dated 15 May 1992:

We have received the form Q. The Director General [intends] to review the assessment under s 101 (1).

You are hereby directed to furnish the following particulars in respect of your claim of capital allowances.

2.1: List of all the assets along with the date of purchase and documentary evidence of ownership.

2.2: The documentary evidence of use in the company.

2.3: In addition to the above you are hereby requested [to produce] all books of accounts to show and [confirm] the ownership.

2. Please note that in the absence of the above documentary evidence the Director General may not amend the notice of assessment.

3. It is proposed to hold a follow up meeting on Monday 25 May 1992 at 10.00 am. in our office. The presence of the board of directors is essential.

[6] Contemporaneously, the revenue had by another letter, also dated 15 May 1992, adressed to the taxpayer, requested the following material:

(1) schedule of export sale;

(2) schedule of payment of extraction fee;

(3) schedule of payment of royalty;

(4) schedule of timber purchased;

(5) schedule of timber licences utilized/issued to outside agency/party;

(6) schedule of utilization of company's timber license;

(7) schedule of purchase of fixed assets.

[7] The taxpayer's agents had replied thereto a letter dated 8 June 1992 which, however, was not included in the record of appeal provided. But, this was followed up by another letter dated 2 September 1992, which was included, and which requested an extension of time of up to 9 October 1992, to submit the information and documents requested because the documents dated back to 1982 and because "certain vital information and documents from third parties" were being awaited. The revenue had, on 4 September 1992, caused to be iss