Hii v Commissioner of Taxation (No 2) [2020] FCA 345

TAXATION – where the applicant seeks to challenge under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) an audit decision and an objection decision in relation to income tax, shortfall penalty and non-lodgement penalty assessments – where the audit decision overtaken wholly by the assessments – where subsequent objection decisions overtaken wholly by the institution of taxation appeal and administrative review proceedings – where those taxation appeal and administrative review proceedings dismissed by the Federal Court and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – where applicant has previously instituted proceedings to challenge collaterally the assessments both in the Federal Court of Australia (Federal Court) and the High Court of Australia (High Court) – where those proceedings were dismissed by Federal Court and by High Court – where s 39B proceedings another form of collateral challenge that bear resemblance to those already disposed of in the Federal Court and the High Court – whether s 39B application should be dismissed summarily Held: s 39B challenge dismissed PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – where the applicant seeks to challenge under s 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) an audit decision and an objection decision in relation to income tax, shortfall penalty and non-lodgement penalty assessments – where the audit decision overtaken wholly by the assessments – where subsequent objection decisions overtaken wholly by the institution of taxation appeal and administrative review proceedings – where those taxation appeal and administrative review proceedings dismissed by the Federal Court and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal – where applicant has previously instituted proceedings to challenge collaterally the assessments, objection and audit decisions in either or each of the Federal Court and the High Court – where those proceedings were dismissed by Federal Court and by High Court – whether the applicant was earlier denied natural justice – whether natural justice requires an affected person to avail themselves of an extended opportunity to be heard – whether the proceedings are subject to Anshun estoppel – whether the proceedings are an abuse of process or vexatious – whether applicant had frequently and without reasonable cause commenced or continued prior proceedings without reasonable case – whether vexatious proceedings order should be made – s 37AO of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Held: vexatious proceedings order made

Full decision here