RSS 
Share
Printer View 
More Cases Finalized
Cases Finalized
This page includes tax cases finalized from 2018 onwards.
- Relating to Inland Revenue Ordinance
- Relating to Estate Duty Ordinance
- Relating to Stamp Duty Ordinance
Cases Finalized:-
Relating to Inland Revenue Ordinance
| Taxpayer's Name | Issues under Appeal | Court |
|---|---|---|
| Besins Healthcare (Hong Kong) Limited |
Application for judicial review against the Commissioner’s refusal to refund the excess TRCs purchased.
|
Court of First Instance
|
|
Cheng Hung Kit
|
Whether the Taxpayer has received the remuneration.
[Previous CFI Case No.: HCIA 4/2020] |
Court of Appeal
|
| China Mobile Hong Kong Company Limited
|
Deductibility of amortisation of upfront lump sum spectrum utilisation fees.
[Previous CFI Case No.: HCIA 2/2017]
|
Court of Appeal
|
|
Church Body of the Hong Kong Sheng Kung Hui/
Hong Kong Sheng Kung Hui Foundation
|
Chargeability of share of profits.
[Previous CFI Case No.: HCIA 2/2009]
[Previous CA Case No.: CACV 41/2010]
[Previous CFA Case No.: FAMV 11/2015]
|
Court of Final Appeal
|
|
Dairy Farm Establishment
[CACV 544/2018]
|
Application for judicial review against the Commissioner’s decision ordering that tax should be held over on the condition that TRCs be bought.
[Previous CFI Case No.: HCAL 234/2018]
|
Court of Appeal
|
|
Excelter Investment Limited
|
Whether it was unlawful for the Board of Review to decide that the Taxpayer’s appeal was out of time.
[Previous CFI Case No.: HCAL 166/2016] |
Court of Appeal
|
| Heath Brian Zarin [CACV 75/2020] [CACV 366/2021] |
Whether certain payment received after termination of employment chargeable to Salaries Tax.
[Previous CFI Case No.: HCIA 4/2019] |
Court of Appeal
|
|
Koo Ming Kown Murakami Tadao
|
Validity of section 82A additional tax assessments issued to two taxpayers, in the capacity as director of a limited company.
[Previous CFI Case No.: HCIA 1/2017] [Previous CA Case No.: CACV 602/2018] |
Court of Final Appeal
|
|
KWP Quarry Company Limited
[FAMV 125/2022]
|
Deductibility of overburden removal costs incurred in quarrying activities.
[Previous CFI Case No.: HCAL 102/2016]
[Previous CA Case No.: CACV 256/2017]
|
Court of Final Appeal
|
|
Leung Chun Kwong
|
Application for judicial review against, inter alia, the CIR’s Tax Decision not to recognize the “marriage” of the Taxpayer having a same-sex spouse for the purposes of the IRO.
[Previous CFI Case No.: HCAL 258/2015] [Previous CA Case No.: CACV 126/2017] |
Court of Final Appeal
|
| Lo Wa Ming, Patrick | The basis of income apportionment under section 8(1A)(c). Whether CIR’s “day in, day out” formula as an apportionment method for calculating exempted income is consistent with and/or in contradiction to and/or in any event leads to an arbitrary or unjust result under sections 8(1)(a) and 8(1A)(c) of the IRO. [Previous CFI Case No.: HCIA 2/2020] |
Court of Appeal
|
| Newfair Holdings Limited [HCIA 1/2021] |
Whether the Taxpayer carried on a business in Hong Kong and whether the Taxpayer’s profits of the business arose in or were derived from Hong Kong.
|
Court of First Instance
|
|
Perfekta Enterprises Limited
|
Whether an "Initial Payment" received under a property development agreement should be chargeable to Profits Tax.
[Previous CFI Case No.: HCIA 1/2016] [Previous CA Case No.: CACV 115/2017] |
Court of Final Appeal
|
|
Poon Cho Ming, John
|
Whether payment in lieu of a discretionary bonus and gain realized by the exercise of share options vested upon termination of employment should be chargeable to Salaries Tax.
[Previous CFI Case No.: HCIA 2/2015] [Previous CA Case No.: CACV 94/2016] |
Court of Final Appeal
|
|
Ren Rong t/a Wah Yung Engineering Company
|
Application for judicial review against the Board’s refusal to extend the time to lodge an appeal.
|
Court of First Instance
|
|
Richard Paul Forlee, M.A.
|
Whether certain share awards and dividends received on those shares chargeable to Salaries Tax.
[Previous CFI Case No.: HCIA 1/2019] |
Court of Appeal |
|
Suen Hung Shan
|
Whether the Taxpayer’s application for leave to appeal to CFI was late.
[Previous CFI Case No.: HCIA 1/2020]
|
Court of Appeal
|
|
The Dairy Farm Company, Limited for Dairy Farm Establishment
[CACV 544/2018]
|
Application for judicial review against the Commissioner’s decision ordering that tax should be held over on the condition that TRCs be bought.
[Previous CFI Case No.: HCAL 234/2018]
|
Court of Appeal
|
| Ubiquiti Networks International Limited |
Application for judicial review against the Commissioner’s decision ordering that tax should be held over on the condition that TRC be bought.
|
Court of First Instance
|
| Mr. Wilson Mark Andrew [CAMP 290/2021] |
Whether 3 sums, the 2010 incentive bonus, the pension entitlement and variance of stock valuation paid upon termination of the Taxpayer’s employment should be taxable.
[Previous CFI Case No.: HCIA 5/2020] |
Court of Appeal
|
Cases Finalized:-
Relating to Estate Duty Ordinance
| Taxpayer's Name | Issues under Appeal | Court |
|---|---|---|
|
Whether the assessed value of the deceased’s interests in various private companies, NT lots and estate of her predeceased husband were excessive, and whether the debt due by the deceased in the form of promissory note was deductible.
|
Court of First Instance
|
|
|
|
Whether a promissory note payable to the deceased by a Hong Kong company was dutiable.
[Previous CFI Case No. HCED1/13]
|
Court of Appeal
|
Cases Finalized:-
Relating to Stamp Duty Ordinance
| Taxpayer's Name | Issues under Appeal | Court |
|---|---|---|
|
Chan Yuk King and Man Kwai Wo
Man Kwai Wo and Man Wai Wah
Chan Yuk King and Man Yu Lung
|
Whether the Court should strike out the appeals on the ground that the appeals disclose no reasonable cause of action and/or are abuses of the process of the Court.
|
District Court
|
|
Chen An
|
Whether partial refund of ad valorem stamp duty should be allowed under section 29DF and whether the Appellant is a "Hong Kong Permanent Resident" for the purpose of section 29A(1) of the Stamp Duty Ordinance (Cap. 117).
|
District Court
|
|
Whether the Court has jurisdiction to strike out the appeal, and if the Court has jurisdiction to grant an extension of time in respect of the time limit stipulated in section 14(2) of the Stamp Duty Ordinance (Cap. 117), whether the Court should exercise its discretion.
|
District Court
|
|
|
Feng Hongyan
|
Judicial review application on the Collector of Stamp Revenue's decision to refuse partial refund of ad valorem stamp duty under section 29DF of the Stamp Duty Ordinance (Cap. 117).
|
Court of First Instance
|
|
Hiu Hung Por
|
Whether leave should be granted to allow the Appellant to postpone payment for stamp duty and to lodge late appeal under sections 14(1B) and 14(5B) of the Stamp Duty Ordinance (Cap. 117).
|
District Court
|
|
Ho Kin Tai and
Ho Kwok Ho [DCSA 325/2019] |
Whether leave should be granted to allow the Appellants to postpone payment for stamp duty under section 14(1B) of the Stamp Duty Ordinance (Cap. 117).
|
District Court
|
|
John Wiley & Sons UK2 LLP and
Wiley International LLC [HCMP 954/2021] |
Whether the Court of First Instance has jurisdiction to hear stamp duty appeal under section 14 of the Stamp Duty Ordinance (Cap. 117).
|
Court of First Instance
|
| Land Concept Limited
[DCSA 9/2012 and DCSA 111/2016] Ample Sun Limited Genius Express Limited Danix Limited [DCSA 44/2013] |
Whether four property transactions effected by four conveyances on sale form part of a larger transaction or series of transactions; and whether valuation of the properties assessed by the Collector is excessive.
|
District Court
|
|
Lucky Project Development Limited
|
Whether a tender form submitted by the Appellant constituted an agreement for sale under section 29A(1) of the Stamp Duty Ordinance (Cap. 117) and whether the Stamp Duty (Amendment) (No. 2) Ordinance 2014 should be applicable.
|
District Court
|
|
Whether two separate assignments constitute an exchange of property for the purpose of section 25(7) of the Stamp Duty Ordinance (Cap. 117).
[Previous District Court Cases No.: DCSA 15/2017 & DCSA 16/2017]
|
Court of Appeal
|
|
|
Nomura Funds Ireland Plc
|
Whether a transfer of Hong Kong stock arising from a merger is chargeable with stamp duty under Head 2 in the First Schedule of the Stamp Duty Ordinance (Cap. 117).
[Previous District Court Case No.: DCSA 4/2017]
|
Court of Appeal
|
|
So Kam Shing and So Kam Wai
|
Whether a distribution of an estate property in excess of the beneficiaries' entitlement under the intestacy should be chargeable with stamp duty and whether section 10(2) of the Stamp Duty Ordinance (Cap. 117) should be applicable.
|
District Court
|
| Tam Lai Ha and Wong Tak Hung
Tam Lai Ha and Wong Tak Hung Tam Lai Ha and Wong Tak Hung Ngan Cheung Wah and Wong Tak Hung Wong Wai Yat and Wong Tak Hung Wong Wai Yat and Wong Tak Hung Wong Tak Hung Chiu Wai Lam and Wong Tak Hung Lo Hau Fai and Fan Lai Chun Kwan Sik Jungaron and Wong Tak Hung Tam Ho Kwong and Wong Tak Hung |
Whether charging buyer’s stamp duty on an instrument where a Hong Kong Permanent Resident acting as a trustee for a Hong Kong Permanent Resident in acquiring a residential property is unconstitutional.
|
Court of First Instance
|
| Tse Sum Ping |
Whether the Appellant was acting on her own behalf under the agreement for the purpose of section 29CB(2) of the Stamp Duty Ordinance (Cap. 117).
|
District Court
|
|
Wang Weichen and
Zhao Bingqing [HCAL 823/2020] |
Judicial review application on the Collector of Stamp Revenue’s decision to refuse partial refund of ad valorem stamp duty paid under section 29DF of the Stamp Duty Ordinance (Cap. 117).
|
Court of First Instance
|
|
Whether a distribution of property under an estate in excess of the beneficiaries’ entitlements is chargeable with stamp duty and whether section 29AL of the Stamp Duty Ordinance (Cap. 117) is applicable.
[Previous District Court Case No.: DCSA 5/2016] |
Court of Appeal
|
|
|
Whether two property transactions effected by two conveyances on sale form part of a larger transaction or series of transactions.
|
District Court
|
|
|
WONG Wing Wah
|
Whether leave should be granted to allow the Appellant to lodge late appeal with bank guarantee under sections 14(1B) and 14(5B) of the Stamp Duty Ordinance (Cap. 117).
|
District Court
|
| Wong Wing Wah [CAMP 42/2020] |
Whether charging buyer’s stamp duty on an instrument where a Hong Kong Permanent Resident acting as a trustee for a Hong Kong Permanent Resident in acquiring a residential property is unconstitutional.
[Previous District Court Case No.: DCSA 97/2016] |
Court of Appeal
|
|
Wong Wing Wah
|
Whether charging buyer’s stamp duty on an instrument where a Hong Kong Permanent Resident acting as a trustee for a Hong Kong Permanent Resident in acquiring a residential property is unconstitutional.
[Previous CFI Case No.: HCAL 1479/2020] |
Court of Appeal
|
|
Yau Sun Yee
|
Judicial review application on the Collector of Stamp Revenue’s decision to refuse partial refund of ad valorem stamp duty paid under section 29DF of the Stamp Duty Ordinance (Cap. 117).
|
Court of First Instance
|