Raffles Town Club v Comptroller of Income Tax: Judicial Review of Income Tax Board of Review Appointment

Raffles Town Club appealed against assessments by the Comptroller of Income Tax. The chairman of the Income Tax Board of Review appointed Mr. Leslie Chew as deputy chairman. Raffles Town Club sought judicial review of this appointment, arguing Mr. Chew's past connections with the club could give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. The High Court held that section 79(3) of the Income Tax Act does not prevent a party from seeking judicial review and declared that Mr. Chew's resignation from the Club could give rise to questions concerning his impartiality.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Application allowed in part.

1.3 Case Type

Tax

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Raffles Town Club sought judicial review of the appointment of a deputy chairman to the Income Tax Board of Review. The court held that Section 79(3) of the Income Tax Act does not prevent such review.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Comptroller of Income TaxRespondentGovernment AgencyNeutralNeutral
Foo Hui Min of Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore
Raffles Town Club Pte LtdApplicantCorporationApplication allowed in partPartial

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Choo Han TeckJudgeYes

4. Counsels

4. Facts

  1. Raffles Town Club appealed against assessments by the Comptroller of Income Tax.
  2. The amount involved in the appeals is more than $500 million.
  3. Mr. Goh appointed Mr. Leslie Chew as the deputy chairman of the Board to hear the Club’s appeals.
  4. Mr. Chew was a founder member of the Club.
  5. Mr. Chew resigned from the Club in October 2006.
  6. The Club argued Mr Chew's past connections could give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Re Raffles Town Club Pte Ltd, OS 603/2007, SUM 2147/2007, [2008] SGHC 46

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Raffles Town Club formed.
High Court decision giving leave to the Club to convene a scheme creditors’ meeting upheld by the Court of Appeal.
Club filed appeals against the Comptroller.
Scheme creditors’ meeting held.
Scheme approved by the High Court.
Mr Chew's claim for vouchers approved by the Club.
Pre-hearing conference held.
Mr Chew resigned from the Club.
Mr Rajendran asked to be excused from hearing the appeals.
Judgment reserved.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Judicial Review
    • Outcome: The court held that s 79(3) of the Income Tax Act does not prevent a party from seeking judicial review.
    • Category: Procedural
  2. Apparent Bias
    • Outcome: The court declared that Mr. Chew's resignation from the Club could give rise to questions concerning his impartiality as the deputy chairman of the Board hearing the Club’s appeals.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Order that the Board be restrained from appointing Mr Chew
  2. Declaratory orders

9. Cause of Actions

  • Judicial Review

10. Practice Areas

  • Tax Litigation
  • Administrative Law

11. Industries

  • Hospitality

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Rich v Christchurch Girls’ High School Board of Governors (No 1)High CourtYes[1974] 1 NZLR 1New ZealandCited to illustrate a case where Parliament expressly permitted the principal to be present at meetings concerning student misconduct, even where natural justice concerns might arise.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Income Tax Act (Cap 134, 2008 Rev Ed) s 79(3)Singapore
Income Tax Act (Cap 134, 2008 Rev Ed) s 79Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Judicial review
  • Income Tax Board of Review
  • Apparent bias
  • Deputy chairman
  • Scheme creditor
  • Natural justice
  • Impartiality

15.2 Keywords

  • Judicial review
  • Income Tax Act
  • Apparent bias
  • Raffles Town Club
  • Income Tax Board of Review

17. Areas of Law

16. Subjects

  • Taxation
  • Administrative Law
  • Judicial Review