Kanowit Timber Sdn Bhd & Anor v Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri [2023] 8 AMR 329, HC

Revenue law – Assessments and appeals – Additional assessment – Taxpayer classified expenditure for road construction with expenditure for repair and maintenance – Whether such expenses deductible under s 33(1) of the Income Tax Act 1967 ("the ITA") or capital in nature – Whether assessments, additional assessments and penalties statute-barred under s 91(1) of the ITA – Whether s 91(3) of the ITA empowers Director General of Inland Revenue to raise assessments at any time upon fulfilment of conditions therein – Whether taxpayer entitled for forest allowance under Schedule 3 of the ITA and/or infrastructure allowance under the Promotion of Investments Act 1986 – Income Tax Act 1967, ss 33(1), 91(1), (3), (3)(a), 113(2), Schedule 3, paragraph 8(1) – Promotion of Investments Act 1986, s 41B(1)(c)

Revenue law – Income tax – Business deductions – Revenue or capital expenditure – Taxpayer classified expenditure for road construction with expenditure for repair and maintenance – Whether such expenses deductible under s 33(1) of the Income Tax Act 1967 ("the ITA") or capital in nature – Whether assessments, additional assessments and penalties statute-barred under s 91(1) of the ITA – Whether s 91(3) of the ITA empowers Director General of Inland Revenue to raise assessments at any time upon fulfilment of conditions therein – Whether taxpayer entitled for forest allowance under Schedule 3 of the ITA and/or infrastructure allowance under the Promotion of Investments Act 1986 – Income Tax Act 1967, ss 33(1), 91(1), (3), (3)(a), 113(2), Schedule 3, paragraph 8(1) – Promotion of Investments Act 1986, s 41B(1)(c)

Kirthiga Suthan a/l Kathiravellu and Shaalini a/p Gajendran [2023] 8 AMR 345, HC

Family law – Marriage – Validity of – Joint petition for annulment of marriage on ground of non-consummation under s 70 of the Law Reform (Marriage & Divorce) Act 1976 ("the Act") – Whether there was evidence of incapacity of either party to consummate marriage – Whether there was evidence of wilful refusal on part of respondent to consummate marriage – Whether s 70 of the Act applicable – Whether petition an abuse of process of court – Law Reform (Marriage & Divorce) Act 1976, ss 52, 70, 70(1), (2), 73

Koh Choo Meng v Pendakwa Raya [2023] 8 AMR 352, HC

Criminal law – Offences against property – Theft by clerk or servant – Appeal against conviction and sentence – Employee committed theft and disposed materials belonging to company to third party – Whether employee acted on instructions of company/its director to dispose said goods – Whether employee was discharging his duties to dispose discarded, unwanted and old materials for recycling – Whether done with consent from company – Whether property disposed was stolen property – Whether payments for disposing items received solely by employee – Whether employee's counsel incompetent for not cross-examining company's director – Whether prosecution had proven all amended charges against employee beyond reasonable doubt – Whether proof of s 414 of the Penal Code sine qua non for proof of s 381 of the Penal Code – Penal Code, ss 381, 414 – Evidence Act 1950, s 114(g)

Nguyen Thanh Long An v Ketua Pengarah Imigresen Malaysia & 3 Ors [2023] 8 AMR 386, HC

Immigration – Removal from Malaysia – Detention of person ordered to be removed – Application for writ of habeas corpus – Order of removal under s 56(2) of the Immigration Act 1959/63 ("the Act") challenged – Applicant deported back to home country after filing of application – Whether court empowered to adjudicate validity of order of removal after deportation – Whether order of removal mala fide and void – Whether s 56(2) of the Act could be invoked without commission of offence under s 56(1) of the Act – Immigration Act 1959/63, ss 34(1)(a), 35, 56(1), (2) – Immigration Regulations 1963, reg 29 – Road Transport Act 1987, s 45A

Public Prosecutor v Mohd Mustaqim bin Razak [2023] 8 AMR 399, HC

Dangerous drugs – Trafficking – Possession – Offence of trafficking methamphetamine – Whether prima facie case against accused for drug trafficking established – Whether identity of drugs seized doubtful – Whether discrepancy in identity of drugs analysed disproved element of knowledge of drugs against accused – Whether possession of drugs established – Whether statutory presumption under s 37(da)(xvi) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 sufficient to prove trafficking in absence of proof of possession of drugs – Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, ss 37(da)(xvi), 39B(1)(a)

Savatery a/p Jayaraman v Teoh Ying Rin [2023] 8 AMR 416, HC

Probate and administration – Wills – Validity of – Testator suffered from end stages of terminal illness when will was executed – Substantial amounts/property bequeathed to director in testator's company who was also propounder of said will – Wife challenged validity of will and sought declaration that testator died intestate – Whether suspicious circumstances surrounding execution of will – Whether testator incapacitated to execute will – Whether propounder of will exerted undue influence over testator – Whether will null and void – Whether burden of proof upon wife to prove undue influence – Whether testator died intestate – Rules of Court 2012, Order 72, Order 78 r 38