CENTRALFIELDS SDN BHD vs KETUA PENGARAH HASIL DALAM NEGERI

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 MarsdenLR 2313

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
CENTRALFIELDS SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
KETUA PENGARAH HASIL DALAM NEGERI – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Bahari Yeow Tien Hong,Dharshini Sharma Rohit Kumar Sharma ,Respondent Advocate: Mohd Harris Hanapi,Azleena Md Khairuddin

Table of Content
1. judicial review application scope. (Para 1 , 2)
2. overview of the facts of the case. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 11)
3. judicial review grounds established. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
4. judgment retrospective vs prospective. (Para 17 , 18 , 19)
5. right to tax refund on unlawful taxes. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)
6. prospective application of federal court rulings. (Para 25 , 26 , 29)
7. compliance with law at the time of assessment. (Para 30 , 32)
8. timeliness and merits of the judicial review claim. (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36)
9. distinguishing pertinent facts between cases. (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40)
10. legal certainty in retrospective declarations. (Para 41 , 44)
11. public interest in prospective applications. (Para 45 , 46 , 47 , 48)
12. final ruling on the application. (Para 50)

Shahnaz Sulaiman J:

Introduction

[1] This application for judicial review relates to s 4C of the Income Tax Act 1967 (" ITA ") which the Federal Court in Wiramuda (M) Sdn Bhd v. Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri 2023 MarsdenLR 702 ; ; held to be unconstitutional.

[2] The only issue before this Court for determination is whether the respondent had committed an error of law in disallowing the ap

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 MarsdenLR 2313

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAMCENTRALFIELDS SDN BHD – AppellantVersusKETUA PENGARAH HASIL DALAM NEGERI – Respondent

Cases Referred (6)

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
CENTRALFIELDS SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
KETUA PENGARAH HASIL DALAM NEGERI – Respondent