Mohamed Hiraz Hassim v Public Prosecutor: GST Evasion on Gemstone Importation
In Mohamed Hiraz Hassim v Public Prosecutor, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal against the decision of the District Court, which convicted Mohamed Hiraz Hassim for fraudulent evasion of Goods and Services Tax (GST) on imported gemstones. Hassim pleaded guilty to the charge under s 130(1)(f)(i) of the Customs Act and was sentenced to a fine of $25,000.00. The High Court, led by Yong Pung How CJ, dismissed both Hassim's petition for criminal revision against his conviction and his appeal against the sentence, finding no merit in his arguments that the conviction was unsafe or the sentence manifestly excessive.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Petition and appeal dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Mohamed Hiraz Hassim was convicted for fraudulent evasion of GST on imported gemstones. The High Court dismissed his appeal against the sentence and petition for criminal revision.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Judgment Upheld | Won | Janet Wang of Deputy Public Prosecutor |
| Mohamed Hiraz Hassim | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Yong Pung How | Chief Justice | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Janet Wang | Deputy Public Prosecutor |
| Wan Mew Lin Margaret | Braddell Brothers |
4. Facts
- Mohamed Hiraz Hassim imported 66 lots of gemstones from Bangkok to Singapore.
- Hassim declared the value of the gemstones as $10,000 to customs officers.
- Customs officers suspected the declared value was underdeclared.
- Hassim admitted the actual value of the gemstones was $43,282.75.
- The GST payable on the gemstones was $2,164.15.
- Hassim only paid $500 in GST.
- Hassim was charged with fraudulent evasion of GST.
5. Formal Citations
- Mohamed Hiraz Hassim v Public Prosecutor, Cr Rev 1/2005, MA 138/2004, [2005] SGHC 23
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Mohamed Hiraz Hassim imported gemstones into Singapore from Bangkok. | |
| Mohamed Hiraz Hassim submitted an invoice with an incorrect value for GST payment. | |
| Mohamed Hiraz Hassim was arrested for fraudulent evasion of GST. | |
| High Court dismissed the petition and appeal. |
7. Legal Issues
- Fraudulent Evasion of Goods and Services Tax
- Outcome: The court upheld the conviction for fraudulent evasion of GST.
- Category: Substantive
- Whether sentence imposed was manifestly excessive
- Outcome: The court held that the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive.
- Category: Procedural
- Whether conviction unsafe
- Outcome: The court held that the conviction was safe.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Criminal Revision of Conviction
- Appeal against Sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Fraudulent evasion of Goods and Services Tax
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Law
- Tax Law
11. Industries
- Retail
- Gemstones
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ang Poh Chuan v PP | High Court | Yes | [1996] 1 SLR 326 | Singapore | Cited for the principles governing the exercise of revisionary jurisdiction, emphasizing the need for a serious injustice. |
| PP v Lee Wei Zheng Winston | High Court | Yes | [2002] 4 SLR 33 | Singapore | Cited as an example of what constitutes serious injustice. |
| PP v Nyu Tiong Lam | High Court | Yes | [1996] 1 SLR 273 | Singapore | Cited as an example of a case where a judge exceeded his powers. |
| PP v Ramlee | High Court | Yes | [1998] 3 SLR 539 | Singapore | Cited as an example of inconsistency in sentencing for two or more offenders participating in the same offence. |
| Abdul Aziz bin Ahtam v PP | High Court | Yes | [1997] 2 SLR 96 | Singapore | Cited as an example of a case where the Statement of Facts did not disclose all the necessary elements of the offence but the petitioner pleaded guilty anyway. |
| Chen Hock Heng Textile Printing Pte Ltd v PP | High Court | Yes | [1996] 1 SLR 745 | Singapore | Cited as an example of a case where the Statement of Facts did not disclose all the necessary elements of the offence but the petitioner pleaded guilty anyway. |
| PP v Koon Seng Construction Pte Ltd | High Court | Yes | [1996] 1 SLR 573 | Singapore | Cited as an example of a case where the petitioner pleaded guilty to a wrong charge and was erroneously convicted of a charge which attracted a heavier punishment. |
| Ng Kim Han v PP | High Court | Yes | [2001] 2 SLR 293 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a guilty plea does not bar the exercise of revisionary power. |
| Teo Hee Heng v PP | High Court | Yes | [2000] 3 SLR 168 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that criminal revision is not a backdoor appeal. |
| Ngian Chin Boon v PP | High Court | Yes | [1999] 1 SLR 119 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court must act with great circumspection when exercising its powers of revision. |
| Mok Swee Kok v PP | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1994] 3 SLR 140 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the High Court should only exercise its powers of revision where it is manifestly plain that the offence charged is nowhere disclosed in the statement of facts tendered. |
| Chia Kah Boon v PP | High Court | Yes | [1999] 4 SLR 72 | Singapore | Cited for the competing considerations in determining an appropriate sentence in relation to GST offences. |
| Moey Keng Kong v PP | High Court | Yes | [2001] 4 SLR 211 | Singapore | Cited for the benchmark sentence of 15 times the customs duty or tax leviable. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Customs Act (Cap 70, 2004 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 130(1)(f)(i) of the Customs Act (Cap 70, 2004 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Goods and Services Tax Act (Cap 117A, 2001 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 8(4) of the Goods and Services Tax Act (Cap 117A, 2001 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 27(1)(a) Customs Act (Cap 70, 2004 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 268 Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 1985 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Sections 26 and 77 of the Goods and Services Tax Act (Cap 117A) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Goods and Services Tax
- GST
- Customs Act
- Fraudulent Evasion
- Gemstones
- Importation
- Criminal Revision
- Manifestly Excessive
- Statement of Facts
15.2 Keywords
- GST
- Customs Act
- Tax Evasion
- Gemstones
- Singapore
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Customs Act | 90 |
| Income taxation | 85 |
| Tax Evasion | 80 |
| Sentencing | 70 |
| Criminal Procedure | 70 |
16. Subjects
- Tax Evasion
- Import/Export Law
- Criminal Law