16
PETALING JAYA Unit 612, 6th Floor, Menara Mutiara Majestic, No. 15, Jln Othman, 46000 PJ, Selangor. T: 03-7784 7255 F: 03-7781 7255 Issue no. 2 of 2014 LEGAL CAULDRON Issue No 2 of 2014 LEGAL CAULDRON Jayadeep Hari & Jamil Advocates and Solicitors The Whistle Blower An overview of the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010 EDITOR: Adeline Chin DESIGN & LAYOUT: Andrew Chee & Adeline Chin CONTRIBUTORS: Shobana Padmanathan Ng Chin Han Barvina Punnusamy Vijayandran Balsingam Andrew Chee Abuse of IT in Office How using the company’s IT facili- ties can get you fired Is There No Way Out? Bankruptcy and it’s ramifications The Malaysian GST You can’t afford to be complacent In this Issue: KUALA LUMPUR Suite 2.03 (2nd Floor) Block A, No 45, Medan Setia Satu, Plaza Damansara, Bukit Damansara, 50490 Kuala Lumpur. T: 03-2096 1478 F: 03-2096 1480 An Affair with RPGT Tax classification, a dangerous game KOTA BHARU 1 2713, 1st Floor, Section 22, Batu 2 Jln Kuala Krai, 15050 Kota Bharu, Kelantan. T: 09-7412050 F: 09-7412051 KOTA BHARU 2 Tkt 2, Lot 11, Bgn Tabung Haji, Kompleks Niaga, Jln Dato’ Pati, 15050 Kota Bharu, Kelantan, T: 09-7479749 F: 09-7474733 MELAKA No.54-1, Jalan TU 2, Taman Tasik Utama, 75450 Ayer Keroh, Melaka. T: 06-2347330 F: 06-2344800 IPOH No. 76 (1st Floor), Jalan Raja Ekram, 35450 Ipoh, Perak. T: 05-2411837 F: 05-2412057

Legal cauldron 2 of 2014

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

The Legal Cauldron (Issue 2 of 2014) explores various matters involving fiscal management which includes an overview on the upcoming Goods & Services Tax (GST) as well as a general write up on tax classification, specifically between the Real Property Gains Tax (RPGT) and the Income Tax in relation to disposal of immovable property in Malaysia. Our associates have also covered in brief the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010, bankruptcy matters and the usage of information technology at your work place.

Citation preview

Page 1: Legal cauldron 2 of 2014

PETALING JAYA

Unit 612, 6th Floor, Menara Mutiara

Majestic, No. 15, Jln Othman, 46000 PJ, Selangor.

T: 03-7784 7255 F: 03-7781 7255

Issue no. 2

of 2014

LE

GA

L C

AU

LD

RO

N Iss

ue N

o 2

of 2014

LEGAL CAULDRON Jayadeep Hari & Jamil

Advocates and Solicitors

The Whistle Blower An overview of the Whistleblower

Protection Act 2010

EDITOR:

Adeline Chin

DESIGN & LAYOUT:

Andrew Chee & Adeline Chin

CONTRIBUTORS:

Shobana Padmanathan

Ng Chin Han

Barvina Punnusamy

Vijayandran Balsingam

Andrew Chee

Abuse of IT in Office How using the company’s IT facili-

ties can get you fired

Is There No Way Out? Bankruptcy and it’s ramifications

The Malaysian GST You can’t afford to be complacent

In this Issue:

KUALA LUMPUR

Suite 2.03 (2nd Floor) Block A, No 45, Medan Setia Satu,

Plaza Damansara, Bukit Damansara, 50490 Kuala Lumpur.

T: 03-2096 1478 F: 03-2096 1480

An Affair with RPGT Tax classification, a dangerous game

KOTA BHARU 1

2713, 1st Floor, Section 22, Batu 2

Jln Kuala Krai, 15050 Kota Bharu, Kelantan.

T: 09-7412050 F: 09-7412051

KOTA BHARU 2

Tkt 2, Lot 11, Bgn Tabung Haji,

Kompleks Niaga, Jln Dato’ Pati, 15050 Kota Bharu, Kelantan,

T: 09-7479749 F: 09-7474733

MELAKA

No.54-1, Jalan TU 2, Taman Tasik Utama,

75450 Ayer Keroh, Melaka.

T: 06-2347330 F: 06-2344800

IPOH

No. 76 (1st Floor), Jalan Raja Ekram,

35450 Ipoh, Perak.

T: 05-2411837 F: 05-2412057

Page 2: Legal cauldron 2 of 2014

Since the publication of our last Legal Cauldron

(Issue 1 of 2014) in January, a storm of calamities has swept

across the globe much to the devastation of many. We had

losses to mourn for, and yet the incredible manifestation of

faith, courage and unity to be grateful for.

This year, we took our motto of “We Care” a

notch further by entering into collaboration with a Hong

Kong based organisation known as Running To Stop Traffic

(RTST) in the fight against human trafficking through hosting

an internship programme in preparation for the upcoming

24-Hour Race which is to be held in Kuala Lumpur for the

very first time come November 2014. Lacing the topic of

anti-human trafficking was a gracious invitation extended to

us to attend the insightful Asia Pacific NGO Conference on

Human Trafficking: Focus on Girls, Young Women & Chil-

dren which was jointly organised by the Malaysian Council

for Child Welfare (MKKM) and the Asian Pacific & South-

east Asia Women’s Association (PPSEAWA) with support

from the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Ministry of

Women, Family & Community. No words could describe

the knowledge we gained from the 3-day conference on the

subject matter, and for that, we extend our heartfelt grati-

tude to the organisers for having us participate in this jour-

ney to enlightenment.

On a separate note, JHJ is also proud to announce

that we have officially launched a new branch office in Ipoh

to serve you better. After all the hard work coupled with

incredible design efforts from the brilliant Sacha & Tan Ar-

chitects, we successfully accomplished our vision of setting

up an environmentally friendly office with zero carbon foot-

print, utilizing only recycled materials in the construction of

the office. Albeit the unconventional office layout, our belief

in providing excellent service to our clients remains reso-

lute.

In this Issue of the Legal Cauldron, the selection of

featured articles are aimed to offer our readers some useful

information on various matters involving fiscal management

which includes an overview of the upcoming Goods & Ser-

vices Tax as well as a general write up on tax classification,

specifically between the Real Property Gains Tax (RPGT)

and the Income Tax in relation to the disposal of immovable

property in line with the escalating trend in our country’s

property investment industry. Picking up from other topics

making the headlines in recent times, our associates have

prepared a brief overview of the Whistleblower Protection

Act 2010 and elaborated on the subject matters of bank-

ruptcy and information technology usage in the work place.

The mission of setting up a 100% eco-friendly

branch office and learning about the brutal odyssey of vic-

tims living in the world of human trafficking has taught us

that despite failures and downfalls, we still have so much to

be grateful for.

We at JHJ thank you for your continuous support

and we hope you enjoy reading this issue of the Legal Caul-

dron.

Legal Cauldron 2 of 2014 | 2

Sincerely,

Adeline Chin Knowledge Department

[email protected]

EDITOR’S NOTE

“We are all equal in the fact that we are all different. We are all the same in the fact that we will never be the same. We are united by the reality that all colours and all cul-tures are distinct & individual. We are harmonious in the reality that we are all held to this earth by the same gravity. We don't share blood, but we share the air that keeps us alive.”

- by C. Joybell C.

Page 3: Legal cauldron 2 of 2014

Legal Cauldron 2 of 2014 | 3

JHJ 360˚ STUDENT ATTACHMENT PROGRAMME 2013/2014

From left: Isabell, Daryl and Joanna

From the pen of Isabell Zubinsha Bt Iskandar Zakaria, LLB (Hons) University of Reading

“As a fresh law graduate the working world to me is like a jungle and my academic qualifications merely the small pocket knife I arm

myself with. This experience with the JHJ 360˚ Attachment Program was like being given a survival kit. In this kit I have been supplied

with an ample amount of personal development, binoculars to view the working culture, and a whole host of tools to adapt and blend with

the natives of this foreign world.

The culture at JHJ of having a low power distance between the partners and their employees allowed me to grow my confidence and to

appreciate that authority should be respected and distinguished from fear which is unnecessary with your employers. It is the concept that

everyone’s opinion is valued. Each person’s work is important to them as mine is to me, and with mutual respect and advanced planning

we can work in synchronicity to allow the firm to function better as a whole.

No longer only armed with the small pocket knife that is my academic qualifications I am truly grateful to have been part of the living and

breathing mechanics of this firm. I now step into the working world with a survival kit and can appreciate better the journey that lies

ahead in my legal career.”

From the pen of Daryl Khor Tet Woei, LLB (Hons) University of London (External)

“I got to know of the JHJ 360˚ Student Attachment Programme through one of my lecturers who also happens to be an associate in JHJ.

He introduced this programme to us during my final year in LLB, and it ignited my interest to join this programme as I understand the

importance for a law student, especially while sitting for the CLP course, to gain practical experience in the legal field.

Upon joining the firm for the programme, I was exposed to various types of training in JHJ. All three of us were provided with a list of

tasks which are divided into the four main departments in JHJ, namely the Corporate, Conveyancing, Conflict Resolution and Knowledge

department. It was truly an eye opener to be exposed to all these different aspects of the legal practice. The unique style of work and types

of matters handled by the different departments have assisted me in the decision-making process on which route to take in the future.

Having joined this programme with zero experience, it is an honour to have the lawyers, pupils in chamber and staff of JHJ providing me

with constructive advice and guidance throughout the duration of my participation. I truly believe that this programme is a good kickstart

to my future legal practice as it helped to sharpen my skills and to gain valuable industry experience. Thank you JHJ for providing me this

opportunity.”

From the pen of Joanna Ka-Yi Bux, LLB (Hons) University of Reading

“By shadowing the lawyers on their daily official duties, I was able to gain insight in a day of a life as a lawyer. The experience to observe

how the lawyers advocated in court and how client meetings were handled was invaluable. It had also given me a sense of fulfilment, ap-

preciation and recognition for the importance of the role of a lawyer.

Another plus factor of the programme was the company (people in the firm). After having interned at different law firms previously, I can

say that the atmosphere at JHJ certainly was a breath of fresh air considering after hearing stories of how stressful the working culture at

a law firm can get. The friendly and camaraderie atmosphere made it easier to approach the lawyers for guidance on certain tasks. De-

spite their busy schedules, the lawyers, chambering students and the staff have never turned me down and were always willing to help.

Their generosity of time and effort taken to explain the tasks, even up to the smallest of details really encouraged and inspired me to be

like them one day. I, for one can truly say that JHJ cares.

This experience has truly been beneficial and would be of tremendous help to my future career. To the JHJ team, I would like to express

my utmost appreciation and thanks for giving me this wonderful and invaluable experience that I will remember for a lifetime.”

Since the launch of our JHJ 360˚ Student Attachment Programme in year 2011, the

programme has grown to receive a positive response from students sitting for

their Certificate in Legal Practice (CLP).

We had the pleasure of knowing and working alongside three talented law students

throughout the course of the programme from November 2013 to March 2014.

Their amicable character and integrity have garnered appreciation and respect

from the JHJ team, and we believe that they, like their predecessors, will also make

valuable additions to the legal fraternity in the near future.

JHJ extend our warmest congratulations for the successful completion of the JHJ

360˚ Student Attachment Programme to Isabell, Daryl and Joanna.

Page 4: Legal cauldron 2 of 2014

The Corruption Perceptions Index 2013 which ranks

countries and territories based on how corrupt their

public sector is perceived to be has ranked Malaysia to

be the 53rd most corrupt country among 176 others.

Recently, Malaysia became a member of the United Na-

tions Convention against Corruption where the country

pledged to be committed in implementing legislative and

administrative measures to ensure compliance of its

obligations to the Convention, which is to prevent and

combat corruption. This and the Government Transfor-

mation Plan [GTP]’s National Key Results Area [NKRA]

which aims to eliminate corruption are reasons behind

the enactment of the Whistleblower Protection Act

2010 [“the Act”].

To “blow the whistle” means to inform on a person or

to expose an irregularity or crime.

Howard Dean, former American politician once said

“When law enforcement and whistleblowers threaten

their corrupt allies, they change the rules of the game”.

Whistleblowing, whether under duty or voluntary, con-

tributes in no small measure to good corporate govern-

ance which is said to encourage both transparency and

accountability.

THE ACT

The Act that came into force on 15 December 2010

extends beyond combatting corruption by also promot-

ing and facilitating disclosure of any improper conduct

in both public and private sectors.

Before the implementation of the Act, protection for

whistleblowers was provided in different aspects

through the Companies Act 1965, Capital Services Act

2007, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009,

Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing

Act 2001, Income Tax Act 1967, Excise Act 1976 and

the recent Personal Data Protection Act 2010.

What sets the Act apart from its predecessors men-

tioned above is that this Act introduces employment-

specific criminal liability for retaliatory action taken at

the workplace against an honest whistleblower.

Employees of an organization are often faced with the

dilemma of whether to disclose information they rea-

sonably believe to be an improper conduct of their em-

ployers or colleagues as they risk severe reprisal if their

identity was known to the person complained about.

REQUIREMENTS OF DISCLOSURE

The Act defines a whistleblower as a person who makes

a disclosure of improper conduct to the enforcement

agency based on his reasonable belief that any person

has engaged, is engaging or is preparing to engage in

improper conduct provided that such disclosure is not

prohibited by any written law.

The phrase ‘reasonable belief’ is not defined in the Act

but the Court of Appeal in the UK case of Babula v

Waltham Forest College [2007] IRLR 346 held that

for an employee to be protected against detriment or

dismissal on the grounds of making a protected disclo-

sure under whistleblowing provisions, it will be sufficient

for the employee to reasonably believe that the employ-

er is in breach of a legal obligation, whether or not such

belief turns out to be wrong.

Improper conduct is defined under Section 2 of the Act

to mean any conduct which if proven, constitutes a dis-

ciplinary offence or a criminal offence. A disciplinary

offence is further defined to mean any action or omis-

sion which constitutes a breach of discipline in a public

or private body as provided by law, a code of conduct, a

code of ethics or even a contract of employment.

To be protected under the Act, a whistleblower’s dis-

closure must be made to an enforcement agency.

A whistleblower is under obligation to make the disclo-

sure to an enforcement agency which includes any Min-

istry, department, agency or body set up by the Federal,

State or local Government which has investigation or

enforcement powers. The protection under the Act

does not extend to disclosures made to the employer,

media, internet, non-governmental organisations etc.

The broad definition of the term “enforcement agency”

creates ambiguity as the Act does not list down which

Legal Cauldron 2 of 2014 | 4

Featured Article Legislation Overview

The

Whistle Blower

About The Author:

SHOBANA PADMANATHAN

graduated from the Malacca Multi-

media University with honours &

has experience in handling various

civil matters.

[email protected]

An overview of the Whistleblower Protection Act

2010

Page 5: Legal cauldron 2 of 2014

Legal Cauldron 2 of 2014 | 5

agencies would fall in this category. However, the Act is

said to be implemented in 7 government agencies i.e.

the Royal Malaysian Police, the Malaysian Anti-

Corruption Commission, the Royal Malaysian Customs

Department, the Immigration Department, the Road

Transport Department, the Companies Commission of

Malaysia and the Securities Commission.

PROTECTION CONFERRED

The Act promises three forms of protection for a whis-

tleblower and any person who is related to or associat-

ed with the whistleblower:

The identity of whistleblower, the person against whom

a disclosure is made and the information disclosed by a

whistleblower.

Immunity from any civil or criminal liability [including

liability from administrative or disciplinary proceedings]

for making disclosure of improper conduct.

Protection against “detrimental action” in reprisal for a

disclosure made by him. This includes any action or

threat to take an action that causes injury, loss or dam-

age, intimidation or harassment, discrimination, demo-

tion, suspension, termination or adverse treatment in

relation to his employment.

An aggrieved whistleblower may make a complaint to

any enforcement agency of any detrimental action com-

mitted against him and upon conviction, the aggressor is

deemed to have committed an offence and will be liable

to a fine not exceeding RM100,000.00 or to imprison-

ment for a term not exceeding 15 years or both.

The burden is on the aggressor to prove that the unfa-

vourable action taken against a whistleblower is not

taken as a consequence of the disclosure made.

The Act now allows a person who commits a detri-

mental action against a whistleblower to be held per-

sonally liable for damages and compensation. Previously,

the aggrieved employee had no option but to leave his

employment to only make a claim for constructive dis-

missal against the employer later.

When a whistleblower is subjected to a detrimental

action or a threat thereof, he may apply to the Court

for an injunction to prevent his employer from continu-

ing, repeating or threatening to continue to repeat the

detrimental action or request the enforcement agency

to apply in writing to his employer for a relocation of

his place of employment.

Even better, the Act empowers enforcement agencies to

reward whistleblowers as an initiative to increase effica-

cy of the Act.

LOSS OF PROTECTION

A whistleblower loses his protection if he has participat-

ed in the improper conduct complained of or where he

willfully makes a material statement which he knew or

believed to be false in his disclosure.

A whistleblower who willfully makes false material state-

ment in his disclosure of improper conduct will be liable

to a fine not exceeding RM20,000.00 or to a term of

imprisonment not exceeding 5 years or both.

INVESTIGATION BY ENFORCEMENT AGENCY

By virtue of the Act, the enforcement agency is under

duty to investigate any disclosure of improper conduct

and any complaint by a whistleblower of detrimental

action taken against him.

After the investigation is conducted, a report of the

finding and recommendations of further steps to be tak-

en must be prepared by the agency where the agency is

obliged to inform the whistleblower of the investigation

results.

CONCLUSION

It is the author’s opinion that an independent panel or

body is to be set up to investigate complaints of improp-

er conducts and acts of reprisal suffered thereof. At

status quo, these complaints will be investigated by gov-

ernment agencies and this might affect public confidence

as to the impartiality and transparency of the investiga-

tion especially if the complaint is made against the same

body that will be conducting the investigation.

It is also the author’s opinion that a whistleblowing poli-

cy should be established in every organisation as a tool

to promote good corporate governance practice.

The one thing that the Enron scandal taught us was that

whistleblowing could have prevented the downfall of an

organization only if the warnings had been heeded in the

first place. The whistleblower in this case tried to warn

her boss and company founder that the company can

“implode in a wave of accounting scandals” and her ef-

forts fell on deaf ears only five months before Enron

collapsed into bankruptcy.

Featured Article Legislation Overview

‘To “blow the whistle” means to

inform on a person or to expose an

irregularity or crime.’

Page 6: Legal cauldron 2 of 2014

With the advancement of technology today, it is be-

coming increasingly difficult to operate a business with-

out the usage of information technology or better

known as “IT” in short.

IT in this context would refer to anything which relates

to the usage of computer technology for the purposes

of storing, retrieving, transmitting and manipulating data

through a intricate combination of network systems,

computer hardware and software, and last but not

least, the Internet. In fact, it is fast becoming a norm for

almost every company to utilise the IT available to

optimize the company’s productivity. This would in turn

mean that you being the company’s employee are ex-

pected to utilize this technology for the benefit of the

company.

Nonetheless, I’m sure that many of you would agree

with me if I were to say that most of you are guilty for

using the same technology that was provided by your

company for your personal use. Personal use here

would include checking your own personal email,

watching live-streaming videos, commenting or posting

on social network sites, downloading non-work related

files or storing personal files in the your company’s

computer.

However, it is pertinent for one to realise that any

company would want to resolve this problem as the

excessive use of the company’s IT facilities by their em-

ployees not merely result in the possible loss of produc-

tivity and profits to a company but, it could also put the

company at risk of facing potential legal suits for in-

fringement of copyright , defamation, or even for the

company’s failure to provide safe working environment

whereby the abuse of IT (e.g. circulation of pornograph-

ic or other inappropriate materials) leading to instances

of assault or harassment. The possibilities are endless.

The key question here would be:-

i. What are the consequences that may arise from the

abuse of IT provided by your company?

ii. Does the law allow companies to terminate one’s

employment for the abuse of IT usage?

The Industrial Court in the case of Bax Global Import

(Malaysia] Sdn Bhd v Saravanan Rajagopal [2007]

ILR 434 has stated that “The provision of internet facility is

basically for work related matters…” Therefore, any abuse

of such facility may amount to misconduct on part of an

employee.

Furthermore, some companies have now adopted an

internal policy [hereinafter referred to as the “internet

access policy’”] in hopes to resolve the problems or

risks they may encounter due to the abuse of the facility

by their employees. Essentially such internet access poli-

cy provides employees with rules and guidelines about

the appropriate use of the company’s IT technology.

Such rules and guidelines also serve to raise awareness

amongst employees as to the repercussions of the

abuse of the company’s IT facilities.

Several clauses that you may find in the Internet Access

Policy are as follows:-

Company employees are expected to use the inter-

net responsibly and productively.

Internet access is limited to job-related activities

only and personal use is not permitted.

The installation of any software on company com-

puter is strictly prohibited.

Company employees are strictly prohibited from down-

loading, copying or pirating software and electronic files

that are copyrighted or without authorization.

Company employees are strictly prohibited from steal-

ing, using, or disclosing someone else's password with-

out authorization.

Legal Cauldron 2 of 2014 | 6

Featured Article HR & Industrial Relations

Abuse of IT in

Office

How using the company’s IT facilities can get you

fired

About The Author:

NG CHIN HAN graduated from

the University of London

(External) with honours & handles

an array of civil matters including

employment disputes.

[email protected]

‘Excessive use of the company’s

IT facilities … could also put the

company at risk of facing potential

legal suits.’

Page 7: Legal cauldron 2 of 2014

Legal Cauldron 2 of 2014 | 7

Based on the above, an internet access policy essentially

contains clauses that restrict the usage of the company’s

IT facilities to job related activities only or clauses that

prohibit all personal use or abuse of the IT facilities at

workplace. Such internet access policy normally also

contains clauses stating that any violation of any such

clauses in the internet access policy may result in disci-

plinary and/or legal action which may include termina-

tion of employment.

But can a company enforce such an internet access poli-

cy and dismiss you on grounds of misconduct?

The implication of the internet access policy can be

seen in the case of Kelana Sidek v Petronas Maritime

Services Sdn Bhd [2011] 1 ILR 155 where the indus-

trial Court held that the Company has dismissed an em-

ployee with just cause and excuse when the employee

breached the company’s Internet Policy.

In this case, the employee with an impeccable record

and performance was dismissed by the company when

the Domestic Inquiry found that the employee had been

distributing and storing pornography material using the

company facility. The Industrial Court agreed with the

findings of the Domestic Inquiry and held that the act

of breaching the Internet Policy does amount to a mis-

conduct that could warrant a dismissal.

In simple words, the decision of the Industrial Court

would suggest that any breach of the internet access

policy by an employee may constitute a misconduct that

would justify dismissal.

This would mean that you are running the risk of being

found to have committed misconduct or at least sub-

jected to a disciplinary inquiry when you are using your

company’s IT facilities for your personal.

Thus, while you expect your company to understand

that you have other responsibilities or obligations apart

from your job, it is equally important to bear in mind

that theoretically, an abuse or misuse of the company’s

IT facilities may bring about whereby your misuse of

company’s IT may amount to misconduct that warrants

your dismissal from the company.

Featured Article HR & Industrial Relations

‘Any breach of the internet access

policy by an employee may constitute

a misconduct that would justify

dismissal.’

JHJ IPOH BRANCH OFFICE

Conference Room

Work Area

War Room

Stairway Terrace

Page 8: Legal cauldron 2 of 2014

Bankruptcy used to be a taboo word. The word was not

used in daily conversations or even spoken in public as it

carried a negative connotation.

However, you would find that recently more and more peo-

ple are talking about bankruptcy. In fact, the Star newspaper

had reported on 9th April 2014 that bankruptcy cases are on

the rise in Malaysia. This was based on an alarming figure

from the Malaysian Department of Insolvency that the total

number of bankrupts as of December last year was 253,635.

The rise of the number of bankrupts in Malaysia raises a

cause of concern as not many people are aware of the im-

pact or consequences of being made a bankrupt.

So what should one know about this once forbidden word?

How does one become bankrupt and what happens after

becoming a bankrupt? Is there no way out of bankruptcy?

Firstly, a person is made a bankrupt in two ways. Either a

creditor i.e. a person to whom money is owed commences

bankruptcy proceedings against you or you may voluntarily

seek for a court order to be made a bankrupt. For a credi-

tor to commence bankruptcy proceedings against you, the

debt must be more than RM30,000.00 meanwhile voluntary

bankruptcy happens when you realize that you are unable to

pay the debts.

There are even some who were not aware that they have

been made a bankrupt until they apply for a loan and find

out from the bank that they were made a bankrupt some

time ago. How does that happen?

Now in making a person bankrupt, the creditor has to serve

the bankruptcy papers on you which mean that if your ad-

dress is not updated then they will not be able to serve the

papers on you. In that instance, the creditor will resort to

substituted service i.e. advertise in the newspaper and you

are deemed to have received notice of the bankruptcy pro-

ceedings against you. So, if you did not update your address

or read the newspapers especially the classified column then

you will not be aware that steps are being taken in court to

make you a bankrupt.

Following an order declaring you as a bankrupt, you will

have to face the consequences of the bankruptcy order. You

must attend to the Malaysian Department of Insolvency’s

branch that administered your bankruptcy case where you

will be required to provide through enquiries details of your

background, family and causes for bankruptcy. You will also

be required to file a Statement of Affairs whereby you will

have to disclose all your assets and liabilities. This is to allow

the Malaysian Department of Insolvency to assess your fi-

nancial position and determine how to administer your as-

sets.

As a bankrupt, your assets vest with the Director General

of Insolvency. It is important to know that as soon as you

are declared as a bankrupt, any of your property will be

automatically vested upon the Director General of Insolven-

cy. This means that you cannot transfer your property to a

third party once you have been adjudged as a bankrupt. If

there a secured creditor i.e. loan bank then the property

would be seized by the bank and upon selling the property if

there is any balance money after paying the debt, it will be

returned to the Director General of Insolvency so that it

can go towards your estate account.

Apart than that, you will also find that your existing bank

account will be deactivated and you will be barred from

withdrawing money from the account. However you can

open a bank account or continuing using your existing ac-

count to credit salary/any profit with the permission of the

Director General of Insolvency. You would have to apply for

permission from the Director General of Insolvency to reac-

tivate the account.

If you loved travelling prior to being made a bankrupt, well

then it is a thing in the past. This is because a bankrupt is

not allowed to travel overseas unless you obtain a written

permission from the Director General of Insolvency or a

court order. You will need to state your intention, reasons

and duration of travelling in applying for permission from the

Director General of Insolvency.

Legal Cauldron 2 of 2014 | 8

Featured Article Bankruptcy & Insolvency

Is There

No Way Out?

About The Author:

BARVINA PUNNUSAMY gradu-

ated from the National University

of Malaysia & has experience in

handling various civil disputes

including bankruptcy matters.

[email protected]

A brief on Bankruptcy

and it’s Ramifications

‘There are even some who were not

aware that they have been made a

bankrupt until they apply for a loan

and find out from the bank…’

Page 9: Legal cauldron 2 of 2014

Legal Cauldron 2 of 2014 | 9

Although being a bankrupt does not prevent you from being

employed but it is subject to your employer as some corpo-

rate companies do have clauses in the employment contract

preventing an employee from continuing employment if

made a bankrupt.

If you are a director of a company or partner in a firm, then

you will have to obtain permission from the Director Gen-

eral of Insolvency or obtain a court order to continue with

your position. You also cannot work in the business of a

relative without permission from the Director General of

Insolvency. Other disqualifications relates to holding the

office of a member of Parliament/public office, practising in

certain professions, maintaining an action in court for dam-

ages related to injuries without permission, receiving pen-

sions and enforcing rights under the law.

So, is there no way out for you once you are made a bank-

rupt? As the saying goes “there is light at the end of the every

tunnel, some tunnels just happen to be longer than others”.

Here, the light comes in three forms for you to be dis-

charged as a bankrupt: -

i) you can apply to court for the bankruptcy order to be

annulled once you have fully paid the debt or if there

were errors in the bankruptcy papers; or

ii) you can apply to court for a discharge on the basis that

you are good bankrupt but this application is subject to

stringent requirement and report from the Malaysian

Insolvency Department; or

iii) you can apply to the Director General of Insolvency for

a discharge after 5 years had lapsed from the time you

were made a bankrupt but this is subject to the discre-

tion of the Director General of Insolvency.

From the above, it is apparent that bankruptcy proceedings

will put you in a difficult position and although you would be

able to come out of the difficult situation but it will leave a

mark on your life as well as your loved ones. Rather than

having to struggle through bankruptcy, it would be ideal if

money is managed well and prudent decisions are made for

the future. You can even make use of government agency

such as Agensi Kaunseling dan Pengurusan Kredit [AKPK]

which can help to manage debt, give financial education and

provide financial counselling. To quote Ernest Hemingway,

“How did you go bankrupt? Two ways; gradually, then suddenly”,

don’t let that be you.

Featured Article Bankruptcy & Insolvency

‘if you did not read the newspapers

… you will not be aware that steps

are being taken in court to make you

a bankrupt.’

Asia Pacific NGO Conference

on Human Trafficking: Focus on Girls, Young Women & Children

The representatives of JHJ had attended the conference held on

the 19th to 21st March 2014 at Istana Hotel Kuala Lumpur.

The conference drew the attention of many interested NGOs

such as Malaysian Council for Child Welfare (MKKM), Asian

Pacific and Southeast Asia Women’s Association (PPSEAWA)

and Council for Anti-Trafficking in Persons (MAPO) as well as

distinguished speakers who champion the fight against human

trafficking both locally and internationally.

From left:: Tan Sri Zaleha Ismail, Datuk Dr. Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar, Datuk

Rahmah Abdul Hamid & Datuk Alwi Hj, Ibrahim

JHJ representatives with Ms Rahayu Saraswati (middle), founder of Indonesia

for Freedom movement, TV presenter, politician and entrepreneur.

Page 10: Legal cauldron 2 of 2014

When disposing an immovable property, the average person

walking on the street would generally concern themselves

with Real Property Gains Tax (hereinafter referred to as

“RPGT”) especially with the significant increase of the

RPGT rates pursuant the proposal under the Budget 2014.

However, even if you have duly paid your dues under RPGT

to the last cent, there is a fair chance for officers from the

Inland Revenue Board (hereinafter referred to as “IRB” or

better known as the Lembaga Hasil Dalam Negeri in Malay)

to show up at your doorstep and greet you with: “Good

afternoon, here is a letter from IRB informing you of your

debt owed to IRB under income tax.”

Keeping in mind that there remains a fine line of distinction

between the classification of your income, let us explore

further the realm of Income Tax against RPGT to examine

what may be the factors in determining such classification

when it comes to the disposal of immovable properties.

We shall begin by examining what falls under the realm of

RPGT and it starts with the explanation of what amounts to

“gains”. In the investment industry, “gains” is essentially the

positive difference between the purchase price and the sale

price of a property. According to the Real Property Gains

Tax Act 1976 (the “RPGT Act”), the word “gains” is defined

as “gains other than gains or profit chargeable with or ex-

empted from income tax under the income tax law …”.

Therefore statutorily, it seems clear that gains taxable under

RPGT would not be taxable as Income Tax.

If that is the case and if there is no issue of double taxation,

why would IRB’s officers come after you for Income Tax

when you have paid your RPGT?

Well, this is where it gets tricky. Let us proceed with an

illustration of the case of MR Properties Sdn Bhd v Ketua

Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri [2005] 7 MLJ 260. On the

facts of this case, the Appellant (“MR Properties”) has duly

paid the required tax under the RPGT Act at the time they

disposed of the land but was subsequently informed by the

Respondent (“IRB”) that the sale transaction was actually

subjected to Income Tax instead. For the understanding of

our dear readers on why the difference in assessments (to

be either RPGT or Income Tax) would matter, MR Proper-

ties was assessed under RPGT for the sum of

RM1,080,768.48 and after that, under income tax for the

sum of RM4,220,064.26.

Clearly the different assessments made a fiscal impact on MR

Properties. What happened next saw the IRB filling a notice

of appeal against the assessment under Income Tax to the

Special Commissioners, and the Special Commissioners had

decided in favour of the IRB which prompted MR Properties

file for an appeal in the High Court.

To summarize matters, the High Court ultimately agreed

with the finding of facts of the Special Commissioners and

dismissed MR Properties’ appeal with cost. In coming to

their decision, the High Court held that the IRB was not

precluded from raising the assessment under the Income

Tax Act after reviewing the earlier assessment made under

the RPGT Act. The IRB are entitled to vacate the earlier

assessment of RPGT payable by MR Properties in lieu of

Income Tax.

Separately, in the case of Teruntum Theatre Sdn Bhd v

Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri [2006] 4 MLJ 685,

the Court of Appeal held that there was no rule of law pre-

cluding the Respondent (“IRB”) from discharging the assess-

ment under the RPGT Act and proceeding with an assess-

ment under the Income Tax Act instead. The court further

held that if the circumstances warrant it, the Respondent

(“Teruntum Theatre”) is free to revise and discharge the

assessment under the RPGT and to raise an assessment un-

der Income Tax.

Legal Cauldron 2 of 2014 | 10

Featured Article Property & Taxation

An Affair with

RPGT

About The Author:

VIJAYANDRAN BALSINGAM

graduated with honours from the

University of London (External) &

is an associate in the Corporate &

Commercial Department.

[email protected]

When income classification turns into a game of

roulette

‘Statutorily, it seems clear that gains

taxable under RPGT would not be

taxable as Income Tax.’ ‘If there is no issue of double taxation,

why would IRB’s officers come after

you for Income Tax when you have

paid your RPGT?’

Page 11: Legal cauldron 2 of 2014

Legal Cauldron 2 of 2014 | 11

Parties in the case of Teruntum Theatre have tried to

bring in the Doctrine of Estoppel but the doctrine was held

not to apply in instances which involves the collection of

taxes. The regulation and collection of taxes falls under the

purview of the Director General of Income Tax and taxpay-

ers merely bears the duty to obey the law. A long line of

cases such as Government of Malaysia v Sarawak Prop-

erties Sdn Bhd [1994] 1 MLJ 14 and Kerajaan Malaysia

v Eng Sim Leong @ Ng Leong Sing [2010] MLJU 354 are

amongst the many other cases that dismissed the application

of the Doctrine of Estoppel in taxation cases in this matter.

A possible justification for the courts for such decision

could be seen in the case of Nike Sales (M) Sdn Bhd v

Jabatan Kastam Diraja Malaysia & Ors [2013] 5

MLJ 21 where the Federal Court had, in consideration for

the interpretation of revenue/tax related statute, referred

to the case of National Land Finance Co-operative

Society Ltd v Director-General of Inland Revenue

[1994] 1 MLJ 99 which among many other things states

that revenue from taxation is essential to enable the govern-

ment to administer the country and that the courts should

help in the collection of taxes whilst remaining fair to tax-

payers.

In order to determine the guidelines on the which type of

gains will fall under RPGT and under Income Tax, a refer-

ence to the case of MR Properties mentioned supra

would be helpful. In the case of MR Properties, the court

has agreed with the finding of the Special Commissioners

whereby the relevant determining factors laid down in cas-

es such as Leeming v Jones, E v Comptroller-General of

Inland Revenue and NYF Realty Sdn Bhd v DGIR were put

into consideration, and further addressed the issues such as

the intention, method of finance, alteration to the property,

treatment to the account, location, period of retention,

subject matter of transaction and circumstances of realisa-

tion. Therefore, it would seem that the applicable tax would

be the tax as deemed by IRB based on the facts presented.

In conclusion, the IRB shall in their discretion amend any

assessment made under the RPGT Act subject to the rules

under the Income Tax Act. Hence in principle, no rule of

law shall prevent IRB from switching an assessment from

RPGT to income tax, and that dreadful knock from the IRB

officers may still happen.

Featured Article Property & Taxation

‘The [IRB] is free to revise &

discharge the assessment under the

RPGT & to raise an assessment

under the Income Tax Act.’

LEGAL UPDATES

1. Permodalan Kedah Berhad v Jalur Canggih Sdn

Bhd & Anor [2013] 6 MLRA 68

An oral agreement was held not to be legally valid as

commercial agreements requiring considerable details

particular to the industry needs to be clearly put into

writing.

2. Malaysia Building Society Berhad v Dato’ Yusuf

bin Sudin [2014] 1 AMR 632

A company director was held to be in breach of his

fiduciary duties for approving a loan sum on behalf of

the company in favor of a third party without the ap-

proval from the company’s Board of Directors.

3. Piccolo Mondo Gastro Sdn Bhd v Absolute Pres-

tige Sdn Bhd [2014] 1 CLJ 387

The rental sum assessed to be paid as damages for the

act of trespass was held to be rightfully calculated at the

property’s market rental value, and not the rental rate

payable by the owner to the local council.

4. Kesavaram Velasamy v Chong Kian Heng [2013]

6 MLRA 199

Generally, ownership of a vehicle would be evidence

that the driver is an agent of the owner, hence the

owner would be liable for the driver’s negligence. How-

ever, the driver would not be an agent of the owner if

the vehicle was not driven for the owner’s purpose.

5. Ingat Kawan (M) Sdn Bhd v Boustead Naval

Shipyard Sdn Bhd [2014] 7 MLJ 24

Licence to deal with second-hand goods given to com-

panies or individuals are restricted to the state it was

issued. Without a valid licence, all agreements entered

pertaining to the transaction of relevant goods are

deemed void and unenforceable.

6. Au Kean Hoe v Persatuan Penduduk D'Villa

Equestrian [2014] 3 MLRA 211(Court of Appeal)

The residential association of a gated residential area

had not committed any nuisance by setting up a guard

house and boom gates to secure the safety of their resi-

dents. Mere inconvenience was distinguished from ob-

struction of access into the residential area.

7. Ahmad Shazilly Ismail Bakti v Nik Salma Zaidah

Hj Wan Mohd Zaid [2014] 3 MLRA 188

(Court of Appeal)

Only rights registrable under the National Land Code

could constitute legal ownership to a property. The

registered proprietor of the property (i.e. owner whose

name is registered in the Land Registry) has all the

rights to request for the equitable owner (i.e. owner by

way of a Statutory Declaration or a Syariah Court Or-

der) to vacate the property upon serving proper notice.

Page 12: Legal cauldron 2 of 2014

1st April 2015 is when the Goods and Services Tax Act

will come into force; less than a year from the time of

writing. The similarity in nomenclature to the Govern-

ment Service Tax (also GST and also 6%), among other

factors, may lull many into thinking that the new GST

operates in largely the same way and hence conclude that

not much preparation may be needed. This is absolutely

the wrong attitude to approach the new GST. Businesses

need to immediately relook their practices and incorpo-

rate the new GST mechanisms.

GST necessitates businesses to modify internal account-

ing practices affected with shorter timelines (depending

on amount of annual sales) to submit the tax return

forms, change informational disclosures on invoices, to

play the role of tax collector (due to provisions requiring

or allowing a taxable person to set off “input tax”), and

to relook employee benefits among other things. All this

will have to be achieved before 1st April 2015. Awareness

is important.

Salient Features of the GST

The draft GST Bill is approximately 180 pages long but

the following are some of the more salient features of

the new GST:

1. Multi-layered Taxation System

The GST (also sometimes known worldwide as VAT

(value added tax)) repeals the Service Tax Act 1975

(“Service Tax”) and the Sales Tax Act 1975 (“Sales Tax”).

These two previous taxes only operate at one level; Sales

Tax (10%) imposed only on manufacturers (e.g. on the

sale of a product to a wholesaler) and Services Tax (6%)

only on services provided to consumers (e.g. on the pro-

vision of a service by a service provider to the consum-

er).

Now under the new GST, all layers of the supply chain

are affected by the imposition of a 6% tax. So if a product

goes through a manufacturer, wholesaler, and retailer

before it ultimately reaches you, then that product has

been taxed 6% at every level by the time you have paid

the purchase price. This may or may not ultimately in-

crease the price of the product for the consumer as we

will see later.

2. Input/Output Tax

An interesting feature of the new GST is the ability for

businesses to claim back “input tax” that it has paid in the

course of the supply of the good or service. Basically, you

deduct the GST payable to your suppliers/vendors (Input

Tax) from the GST you collect from your customers

(Output Tax) and pay the net amount to the Royal Malay-

sian Customs (RMC). For example:

(i) Manufacturer sells RM10 worth of product to

Supplier

Selling price: RM10 x 6% GST = RM10.60

GST collected/Output Tax = RM0.60

(payable by Manufacturer to RMC)

Nothing deducted since there is no input

tax in this example

(ii) Supplier sells the product + RM10 profit to

Consumer

Selling price:

[RM10 (cost) + RM10 (profit)] x 6% GST

= RM21.20

GST collected/Output tax = RM1.20;

GST paid/Input tax = RM0.60;

Output tax – Input tax = RM0.60

(payable by Supplier to RMC)

(iii) Consumer pays RM21.20 – final price paid by

Consumer.

The new GST effectively makes you (apart from the ulti-

mate consumer) the tax collector for RMC. You are re-

quired to make the necessary calculations/deductions and

pay the net amount to RMC (and of course keep the nec-

essary records). There are penalties for wrong calcula-

tions (if not rectified in time) and naturally for tax eva-

sion.

3. Broad-based Taxation System

Whereas Sales Tax only applied to manufacturers and

Legal Cauldron 2 of 2014 | 12

Featured Article Business & Taxation

The Malaysian

Goods & Services

Tax

About The Author:

ANDREW CHEE graduated with

honours from the University of

London (External) and is an

associate in the Corporate &

Commercial Department.

[email protected] You can’t afford to be complacent

Page 13: Legal cauldron 2 of 2014

Legal Cauldron 2 of 2014 | 13

Service Tax is not applicable unless expressly prescribed,

the GST applies to any and all supply of goods and ser-

vices into Malaysia unless exempted. This means that

some businesses which may not have incurred taxes un-

der the Sales or Service Tax previously may now incur

GST. More specifically, all goods and services will now

carry GST unless they are “zero-rated” or “exempted”.

There is a technical difference between “zero-rated” and

“exempted”. An exempt supply is a supply of goods or

services which are not subject to GST, whereas a zero-

rated supply is a supply which is subject to GST but at

rate of 0%. Businesses providing zero-rated supplies will

still need to register for GST if it breaches the threshold

amount of RM500,000 worth of supply per annum. Cur-

rent zero-rated and exempt supplies for the time being

include certain essential items like rice, unprocessed

meats, salt, sugar, and flour, public transportation, educa-

tion, sale and rental of property, and electricity consump-

tion up to 200kwH (presumably per month).

Being broad based means that certain types of business

will fall under the GST net for which Sales or Service Tax

did not apply; thereby probably increasing the costs of

certain items. For services provided by professional

firms, you need to note that even disbursements are sub-

ject to GST; not just the professional fees. Furthermore,

without going into detail, employers now need to consid-

er the provision of employee benefits which now is also

subject to GST (but with various exceptions).

Whether or not GST becomes more applicable to more

types of businesses also needs to be also looked at in

light of the new threshold amount for which GST be-

comes applicable; i.e. RM500,000 worth of supply per

annum.

The streamlining of the threshold criteria to just one

number makes things simpler but may both increase or

decrease costs to the ultimate consumer. For example,

the threshold for “restaurants located outside hotels”

was RM3,000,000 per annum under the Service Tax but

now, such restaurants will have to impose GST if supply

exceeds RM500,000 per annum.

However, the threshold previously for a car park opera-

tor was set at RM150,000 per annum but now they need

not impose GST unless supply exceeds RM500,000 per

annum.

The fear for the average consumer of course is not only

the increase of prices, but also unscrupulous abuse of

GST to rake in more profits or to raise prices indiscrimi-

nately. But together with GST, the Anti-Profiteering Act

was also tabled which will hopefully deter such practices.

4. Modification of Internal Accounting Proce-

dures

Among the need for businesses to immediately make

preparation for GST are due the changes in taxable peri-

ods and informational disclosures. The taxable periods

are:

(i) For businesses below RM5,000,000 annual

turnover: 3 month taxable period; and

(ii) For businesses above RM5,000,000 annual

turnover: 1 month taxable period.

The Service Tax Act previously mandated a two-month

reporting cycle but if you have more than RM5,000,000

turnover per annum, you must now acclimatise to a one-

month taxable period. You will now need to beef up in-

ternal reporting and data compilation to meet the shorter

timeline and hence advance planning and sufficient human

resource become vital.

Further to that, the new GST mandated invoice requires

more thorough disclosures than under the Service Tax.

Systems used by existing businesses may not simply sub-

stitute the words “Service Tax” for “GST” in their invoic-

es and expect to be compliant. This requires your ac-

counting software and systems to be relooked… immedi-

ately.

5. Invoice basis not Cash basis

Previously Service Tax was payable only when received

from the customer or when 12 months have elapsed

since the invoice date (cash basis). The new GST howev-

er works on an “invoice basis” where GST returns must

be submitted and paid within one month after the taxable

period whether or not the customer has actually paid.

This will affect the cash flows of business which extend

credit periods of more than a month and like it or not,

you will have to fork out GST payments before actual

collection from the customer. Cash flow planning be-

comes crucial here.

Conversely however, input tax can be claimed even

though you have not actually paid your supplier/vendor

yet. But there is a six-month “no pay rule” which revers-

es such claims if you do not pay your suppliers/vendors

within such time.

Featured Article Business & Taxation

‘Businesses need to immediately

relook their practices and incorporate

the new GST mechanisms.’

Page 14: Legal cauldron 2 of 2014

Legal Cauldron 2 of 2014 | 14

Why You Cannot Afford to be Ignorant

From the salient features described above, summarily,

you cannot afford to be ignorant because:

a) You are playing the “role” of a tax collector

which means your internal accounting processes

have to be prompt and thorough or face penal-

ties;

b) You have to acclimatise to new (1 or 3 month)

accounting periods and this period is now short-

ened by half to 1 month (from 2 months under

the Service Tax regime) if you have a turnover

of more than RM5,000,000 per annum; and

c) New cash flow processes need to be imple-

mented to accommodate the “invoice basis”

mechanism, subject to some reversals, you will

have to pay GST whether or not you have re-

ceived payment from your customers or clients.

So does this makes things more expensive for you

as a consumer?

No discourse on GST is complete if it does not discuss

what the average Malaysian is now very concerned with.

Apart from features and consequences of the new GST,

the question that has been on everybody’s mind is: does

it make things more expensive for me? The answer is it

depends.

When someone says “more expensive” in this context, it

can be taken to mean more expensive as compared to

the existing Sales and Service Tax regime. In reality there

are very few goods and services for which the consumer

currently incurs both Sales and Service Tax. Hence for

the purposes of comparison, we may make three.

(i) No Service Tax but 6% GST – same price

Let’s say a manufacturer supplies rice at RM10 to a res-

taurant that sells it you with RM10 profit.

(ii) No Sales Tax but 6% GST – cheaper price

Let’s say a manufacturer sells a t-shirt to a retail outlet

for RM50 and the retailer sells it to you at RM20 profit.

(iii) No Sales or Service Tax but 6% GST – more

expensive

Let’s say a manufacturer sells a camera at RM100 (for

which no Sales Tax applies) to a retailer who sells it to

you at RM50 profit (for which no Service Tax applies).

Notwithstanding however, in light of the broader cover-

age of the GST, it is generally expected that prices for

most things for the consumer will increase simply due to

the fact that GST is imposed on more goods and services

than the current Service and Sales Tax. The fact that dis-

bursements for professional services are also subject to

GST is an indicator; you can expect to pay that much

more toward your lawyer’s or accountant’s fees.

Conclusion

The coming into force of the GST signifies to businesses

that it becomes imperative that action be taken immedi-

ately. The fact that the new tax regime, on the surface,

sounds similar to the deceptively (albeit unintentionally)

camouflages very fundamental and critical differences that

one must take cognisance of. You will be penalised if you

are not in compliance and you will start losing profits if

you do not address cash flow issues that now arises. You

must get the necessary advice and consult your tax, ac-

counting or legal consultants without delay.

Featured Article Business & Taxation

6% Service Tax 6% GST

Manufacturer sells to

restaurant at RM10 (no

Service Tax);

Restaurant sells to con-

sumer at RM20 (+6%

Service Tax);

Ultimate price to con-

sumer = RM 21.20

Manufacturer sells to

restaurant at RM10

(6% GST) = RM10.60;

Restaurant sells to

consumer at RM10

(cost) + RM0.60 (GST)

+ RM10 (profit) +

RM0.60 (GST);

Ultimate price to con-

sumer = RM21.20

(same)

10% Sales Tax 6% GST

Manufacturer sells to

retailer at RM50 (10%

Sales Tax) = RM55;

Retailer sells to consum-

er at RM50 + RM5

(Sales Tax) + RM20

(profit) (no Sales Tax);

Ultimate price to con-

sumer = RM75.00

Manufacturer sells to

retailer at RM50 (6%

GST) = RM53;

Retailer sells to con-

sumer at RM53 + RM3

(GST) + RM20 (profit)

+ RM1.20 (GST);

Ultimate price to the

consumer = RM74.20

(cheaper)

No Sales or Service Tax 6% GST

Manufacturer sells to

retailer at RM100 (no

Sales Tax);

Retailer sells to consum-

er at RM100 + RM50

(profit) (no ServiceTax);

Ultimate price to con-

sumer = RM150.00

Manufacturer sells to

retailer at RM100 (6%

GST) = RM106;

Retailer sells to con-

sumer at RM100 + RM6

(GST) + RM50 (profit)

+ RM3 (GST);

Ultimate price to the

consumer = RM159.00

(more expensive)

Page 15: Legal cauldron 2 of 2014

Legal Cauldron 2 of 2014 | 15

Photo Article Charity & Family Day 2014

CITY REVIVAL GIRLS HOME • CITY REVIVAL BOYS HOME

COPYRIGHT © 2014 • JAYADEEP HARI & JAMIL • ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Page 16: Legal cauldron 2 of 2014

Kuala Lumpur . Petaling Jaya . Kota Bharu . Melaka . Ipoh

This is a publication produced by the JHJ Knowledge Department. For any inquiries, please do not hesitate to contact

us: T: 03-2096 1478 | F: 03-2096 1480 | E: [email protected] | W: www.jhj.com.my

Publisher: Messrs Jayadeep Hari & Jamil, Suite 2.03 (2nd Floor), Block A, Plaza Damansara, Bukit Damansara, 50490 KL.

Printers: Pressworks Enterprise, No 20, Jalan Usaha Satu 25/2A, 40400 Shah Alam.