With a tax bill of $3.3 million and climbing, Xiaoquan Jia failed in his challenge to Inland Revenue’s assessment of taxable income arising from property development. An earlier Taxation Review Authority ruling was conclusive and Inland Revenue’s refusal to reopen his tax assessment could not be challenged by judicial review, the High Court ruled.
Tax law provides a statutory disputes process headed by the Taxation Review Authority, a specialist tribunal dealing with tax disputes.
Mr Jia could not re-argue his case beyond an earlier Taxation Review Authority ruling by claiming Inland Review wrongly refused to consider new evidence, the High Court ruled.
The High Court was told a 2018 tax investigation into Mr Jia’s business activities resulted in a $1.7 million tax assessment for profits from the sale of five properties Mr Jia had purchased in the name of Chinese nationals. A penalty of $407,250 was added as an ‘evasion shortfall penalty.’
Mr Jia has made no payments.
This tax debt has escalated to $3.3 million with addition of ‘use of money’ interest and late payment penalties.
He now argues the supposed taxable profit made from property dealings was miscalculated.
When Inland Revenue refused to consider what he said is new specialist evidence as to construction costs for the period over which the five properties were built, Mr Jia challenged this refusal in the High Court.
Justice Blanchard ruled the earlier Taxation Review Authority ruling is conclusive.
At the three day Authority hearing, Inland Revenue relied on evidence from industry sources about contemporary construction costs. The Authority did not accept Mr Jia’s evidence as to construction costs he actually incurred.
Inland Revenue was justified in refusing to consider Mr Jia’s later further evidence, Justice Blanchard said.
Jia v. Commissioner of Inland Revenue – High Court (18.06.26)
26.186