Taxation Law Name of the Student Name of the University Author's Note Part A Arthur Murray (NSW) Pty Ltd v FCT (1965) 114 CLR 314 Case Facts

TAXATION LAW 1 TAXATION LAW Taxation Law 1997 Name of the Student Name of the University Author’s Note Part A Arthur Murray (NSW) Pty Ltd v FCT (1965) 114 CLR Case Facts During the relevant years, the involvement of the company can be seen in the business for providing the tuition of dancing and received fees of different amount based on each hour. For this reason, the taxation commission concluded that the tax payer did obtain the assessable income as prepaid fees during the year of

Running head: TAXATION LAW
Taxation Law
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author’s Note

1TAXATION LAW
Part A
Arthur Murray (NSW) Pty Ltd v FCT (1965) 114 CLR 314
Case Facts
During the relevant years, the involvement of the company can be seen in the business for
providing the tuition of dancing and received fees of different amount based on each hour. As
per the case, the available basic tuition courses were of 5, 15 and 30 hours of the private tuition
to be taken on appointment on a time span of one year. The payment used to be made in advance,
in the form of installment and discount is provided for the immediate payments.
The payment of the fees used to be immediately credited in the books of the company
based on their receipts under the account name of ‘Unearned Deposits- Untaught Lesson
Account’. The amounts of the above-mentioned account were similar to the lessons taught and
they were transferred periodically to the account named ‘Earned Tuition Account’. The company
made the income tax returns based on the footings that are the fees; the fees received in advance
was exempted from the income tax during the time of the receipts. The commission used to do
the income assessment by taking into consideration the fees received in advanced as they were
supposed to be considered as income in case they were received in the income year (Kenny
2013).
The taxpayer did treat the prepaid of the tuition as income as it was obtained and it was
also recorded in the books of the account after the completion of the lessons. Apart from this, the
prepaid sum of the tuition fees was no included in the income of the taxpayer. However, while
calculating the income, the fees were found that was included in the assessable income during
the year it was received. For this reason, the taxation commission concluded that the tax payer

2TAXATION LAW
did obtain the assessable income as prepaid fees during the year of providing the tuition or the
year in which the company obtained the fees. Based on “section 25 (1) of the ITAA 1997”, the
receipts of the prepaid tuition fees did develop an ordinary income (Somers and Eynaud 2015).
Issue
The main issue in this case is to determine whether the taxpayer obtained the prepaid
tuition fees during the year in which received or not. This issue of this case demands the
assessment of the aspect that whether the taxpayer’s taxable income develops a prepaid tuition
fees or not.
Conclusion
The main objective of this case involves in understanding that whether income of the
taxpayer in the form of prepaid fees was taxable or not. According to the verdict of the court of
law, the received fees of tuition in advance but yet to be received would not be a part of the
taxable income of the person (Somers and Eynaud 2015). Apart from this, the count also
mentioned that there would be an agreement between the taxpayer and the student about the fact
that no refund would be possible against the advanced fees. However, in actual, the taxpayer was
supposed to refund the advanced fees in case there is no tuition provided to the student.
According to the verdict of the count of law, the taxpayer did not include the tuition fees as the
income in the year due to the probability to refund the money in case there was no tuition
provided to the student by the taxpayer. For this reason, in the presence of all these facts, the
taxation commission passed the final verdict that the tuition fees that were obtained by the
taxpayer do not possess any characteristics of being income until the rendering of the service
(Somers and Eynaud 2015).

3TAXATION LAW
Answer to [a]
o i) As per 6-5 of the ITAA 1997, the sum must be treated as the income in case the person
receive any amount in the behalf of the taxpayer. Moreover, the requirement for the
taxpayer is to include any derivation in such income in the taxable income in respect of
the taxation law of 6-5 of the ITAA 1997 (Richards 2014).
Two methods are there for the computation of income for the purpose of taxation income
and they are earning method and receipts method. The taxpayer is needed to choose the
method based on the suitability. As per 98/1, it is involved with the income ascertainment
on the based on the receipts or earnings methods. As per Subsection 6-5(2) of the ITAA
1997, the taxpayer is required to include the gross amount of their taxable income for the
derived gross amount (Jones 2017).
As per the taxation ruling of 98/1, the receipts method is the most appropriate method to
ascertain the income obtained from investment. However, exemption of this rule is there.
The earning method is regarded as the most suitable method to determine the income
generated from manufacturing or trading business. As per the general rule, the earnings
method is considered as the most suitable method to treat the income for the purpose of
taxation.
ii) As per the case study of RIP, the business has been engaged in providing the funeral
related services. In the year 2016, the net profit of the company was $2.45 million. In
addition, the company has other sources of income that is to provide credit to their
customers with the conduction for payment with 30 days span. For treating the income of
RIP for assessment, it is crucial to take into consideration the earnings method as per
Subsection 6-5(2) of the ITAA 1997. In order to provide the appropriate reflex to

4TAXATION LAW
income, earnings method can be considered as the most appropriate method (Norbury
2014).
From the later instances, the advance receive of the fees by the company can be noticed.
The treatment of easy future plan’s advance fees received is done as non-refundable. One
has the option for the forfeiture of advanced fees payment and the Forfeited Payment
Account receives this transfer when failure from the person can be seen for the payment
of all installments as per the plan. For this reason, it is required for RIP to consider the
receipts of the forfeit fees as income due to the non generation of further liability under
the easy future plan.
o As per the principle of the case of “Arthur Murray (NSW) Pty Ltd v FCT (1965) 114
CLR 314”, a person is needed to consider the advance income received as income of the
year in that the service is provided (Barnett and Harder 2014). According to RIP’s easy
future plan, the receiver of the fess is done in advance basis and the future funeral
services would be provide by the organization. As per the approach of the case law,
instead of setting the hard and fast regulations, the company is required to provide
appropriate weightage in the taxpayer’s situation. Thus, the determination of the income
is required to be done as per the accounting method in order to provide the correct
reflection of the income during the year (Barnett and Harder 2014).
According to the court of law in “Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Dunn (1989)”,
there is a need for the determination of circumstances of occupation, the process to carry
on the business along with the process to keep the books of the account (Dirkis and
Bondfield 2013). It needs to be mentioned that RIP Pty Ltd is needed to take into
consideration the exact same mechanism for their books of accounts. Thus, there is

5TAXATION LAW
similarity in the cases of RIP and Arthur Murry. For this reason, the applied principles in
the case of Arthur Murray can be applied in the case of RIP Pty Ltd for doing the
accounting treatment. Thus, there is not any requirement for the organization for the
inclusion of advance fees received so that they can be treated as the receipts in the year.
Hence, the requirement for RIP is to record the advanced fees received in order to
consider them as income for the company (Dirkis and Bondfield 2013).
o As per TR 98/1, this rule is applicable for the taxable individuals and the companies;
earnings or receipts method should be used for ascertaining the assessable income. As per
Subsection 6-5 (4) of the ITAA 1997, the accounting receipt method is regarded as the
income of the taxpayer either continuously or in breaks (Joseph 2017). As per the
regulation of this section, the person needs to obtain the income in case the payment is
not done originally (Joseph 2017).
The earnings method is considered as the credit method or the accrual method and as per
this method, the taxpayer obtain the earnings when it is earned.. In this scenario, one
important assertion is that it will be possible for the commissioner and the taxpayer to
select the earnings method or the receipts method for the computation of income for the
purpose of assessment (Joseph 2017).
Answer to [b]
According to RIP Pty Ltd, one needs to consider the advance partial fees received for
forfeiture if the failure of the customer is there for the advance payment of installments. The next
process involves in the transfer of this amount to the Forfeited Payment Account. The received
fees of RIP Pty Ltd were non-refundable. Thus, based on the whole scenario of this case, the

6TAXATION LAW
suggestion can be bought forward that the forfeited amount of $16,000 will be held as income
(Leighton-Daly 2013).
Part B
Answer to [a]
According to section 70-10 of the ITAA 1997, the trading process is regarded as to
produce, manufacture and acquire anything so that they can sell them for earning money
(Blissenden 2015). As per section 70-25 of the ITAA 1997, trading stock sum is not capital in
nature. The non-inclusion of GST assets can be seen in the trading stock and they are uncovered
under Section 275-105. The main purpose of the purchase of caskets and accessories by RIP is
the ordinary course of busienss; thus, it is held as trading stock instead of capital assets
(Blissenden 2015).
As per Section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997, the sums that are developed at the time of the
purchase of the trading stock will be subjected to deduction (O'Connell, Martin and Chia 2013).
Accordingly, in case of RIP Pty Ltd, the company is required to hold the purchase of trading
stock as allowable deduction. In addition, it will be possible for RIP Pty Ltd to claim allowable
deduction related to the trading stock that form the part of stock in hand. According to section 8-
1 of the ITAA 1997, an individual is allowed for the claiming of deduction for assessable
income. RIP Pty Ltd paid $25,000 as prepaid expenditure of the trading stock. Thus, it is
required to hold this prepayment sum as advance for the income year ended June 2016
(O'Connell, Martin and Chia 2013).

7TAXATION LAW
Answer to [b]
As per Section 6-5 of the ITAA 1997, income from the ordinary sources refers to the
income derived from the ordinary sources (Richards 2014). It is the responsibility of the business
organizations to pay tax on the income that is gained from the dividends. In the case of RIP,
evidence can be seen for the income received from the dividends. For this reason, in case of RIP,
the income from dividend that the company has received by paying franking dividend should
take away the credit of franking as the dividends are fully franked (Richards 2014).
Answer to [c]
According to section 100-25 of the ITAA 1997, it is not the part of the capital asset that
is referred to the advance payment associated to the rental storage (Blissenden 2015). Similarly,
by taking this law as reference in the case of RIP Pty Ltd, it would not be a part of capital storage
asset that the amount is received from the rental. According to the further evidence in the case of
RIP Pty Ltd, the advanced rent payment would be a part of the current income related o the sum
of four months; thus, the rent will be considered as general deduction according to Section 8 of
the ITAA 1997 Act (Brink 2015).
Answer to [d]
Business organizations make some payments for long-leave services or employment
termination and they are subject to PAYG withholding. The Australian Taxation Office entitles
the employees for long service leave tile the end of the service period. Moreover, based on the
employment terms, the long service leaves can be accrue (Saunders and Stone 2018). According
to Section 83-80 of the ITAA 1997, the unusual long service leave is not the part of assessable
income. A taxpayer can get the opportunity of tax offsetting for the unused amounts of the
payment of long service leaves for ensuring that the income tax amount is not more than 30%

8TAXATION LAW
according to the subsection (2) of section 83-85 of ITAA 1997 (Saunders and Stone 2018).
Similarly, for RIP Pty Ltd, the payment of the company for long service leave for three months is
needed to be held as expenses for the income year ended 30 June 2016.
Answer to [e]
section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997 provides the authority to the tax payers for the claiming of
deduction that is associated to the un-incurred expenses for deriving the taxable income of the
taxpayer. Moreover, 100-25 of the ITAA 1997 mentions about certain GST assets and the land
and building is needed to be considered (Butler and Skandakumar 2014). In case of RIP Pty Ltd,
the incurred expenditure by the taxpayer related to the land and building forms the part of capital
asset and it is not allowed for general deduction. Thus the requirement is to hold the incurred
expenditure as capital expenditure and there is not allowable deduction allowed in the provided
case. Similarly, the expenditure related to the onsite car parking by RIP Pty Ltd along with the
expenditure on the equipment and landscaping will be required to be held as capital expense that
is not subject to deduction as per section 8-1 of the ITAA 1997 (Butler and Skandakumar 2014).

9TAXATION LAW
References
Barnett, K. and Harder, S., 2014. Remedies in Australian private law. Cambridge University
Press.
Blissenden, M., 2015. The income tax and CGT consequences of property disposals. Taxation in
Australia, 49(7), p.385.
Blissenden, M., 2015. The income tax and CGT consequences of property disposals. Taxation in
Australia, 49(7), p.385.
Brink, S., 2015. An evaluation of the income tax treatment of client loyalty programme
transactions by South African suppliers. Journal of Economic and Financial Sciences, 8(1),
pp.145-164.
Butler, D. and Skandakumar, K., 2014. TR 2013/D7-apportioning SMSF expenses. Taxation in
Australia, 48(8), p.455.
Dirkis, M. and Bondfield, B., 2013. Striking Gold Offshore with Australia's Tax Information
Gathering Powers: Alchemy or Evolution. J. Austl. Tax'n, 15, p.41.
French, R., 2013. Law-complexity and moral clarity. Brief, 40(6), p.25.
Jones, D., 2017. Tax and accounting income-Worlds apart?. Taxation in Australia, 52(1), p.14.
Joseph, S.A., 2017. Taxing Sovereign Wealth Funds: Looking to Singapore for Inspiration. Fed.
L. Rev., 45, p.17.

10TAXATION LAW
Kenny, P.L., 2013. Aligning Income Tax Laws with Accounting Rules: A Simplified Tax
System Case Study.
Leighton-Daly, M., 2013. Taxation, civil forfeiture and unexplained wealth: Part 2. Taxation in
Australia, 47(9), p.574.
Norbury, M., 2014. Tax cases: Are the winnings of Shamus award the commissioner's?. Taxation
in Australia, 48(7), p.384.
O'Connell, A., Martin, F. and Chia, J., 2013. Law, policy and politics in Australia's recent not-
for-profit sector reforms. Austl. Tax F., 28, p.289.
Richards, R., 2014. Taxation: Employee share schemes. Law Society Journal: the official journal
of the Law Society of New South Wales, 52(3), p.40.
Richards, R., 2014. Taxation: Employee share schemes. Law Society Journal: the official journal
of the Law Society of New South Wales, 52(3), p.40.
Saunders, C. and Stone, A. eds., 2018. The Oxford Handbook of the Australian Constitution.
Oxford University Press.
Somers, R. and Eynaud, A., 2015. A matter of trusts: The ATO's proposed treatment of unpaid
present entitlements: Part 1. Taxation in Australia, 50(2), p.90.