LAM KAM WING vs KETUA PENGARAH HASIL DALAM NEGERI

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 MarsdenLR 2580

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
LAM KAM WING – Appellant
Versus
KETUA PENGARAH HASIL DALAM NEGERI – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:George Lim,Chew Peng Hui ,Respondent Advocate: Ashrina Ramzan Ali,Surani Che Ismail

Table of Content
1. control through shareholding impacts tax exemption. (Para 1 , 2 , 12)
2. appellant's tax allowances are key to the case. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. disagreement over applicability of tax exemption rules. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
4. interpretation of control for taxation exemptions. (Para 10 , 11 , 19 , 28)
5. legal interpretation determines tax liability. (Para 13 , 17 , 23)
6. penalty imposed based on intention and previous precedent. (Para 31 , 32 , 41 , 42)

Mohamed Zaini Mazlan JCA:

Introduction

[1] This appeal is against the High Court's decision which had by way of case stated affirmed the Deciding Order of the Special Commissioner of Income Tax ('SCIT'). The SCIT had dismissed the appellant's appeal regarding the Notices of Additional Assessment for the Years of Assessment 2011 and 2012.

[2] The primary issue in this appeal is whether the allowances received by the appellant, as an employee, are exempt from taxation, given that he owns a 30% share in the company and is considered by the respondent to have control over his employer. This appeal will require a determination of what it means to have control over a company through share ownership, as outlined in the Income Tax (Ex

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 MarsdenLR 2580

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYALAM KAM WING – AppellantVersusKETUA PENGARAH HASIL DALAM NEGERI – Respondent

Cases Referred (5)

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
LAM KAM WING – Appellant
Versus
KETUA PENGARAH HASIL DALAM NEGERI – Respondent