(Translation from the original Bahasa Malaysia
text)
Public Ruling No.
8/2000
WILFUL EVASION
OF TAX AND RELATED OFFENCES
| 1.0 | TAX
LAW This Ruling applies in respect of wilful evasion and other related offences under section 114 of the Income Tax Act 1967. This Ruling is effective from 1 January 2001. |
| 2.0 | THE APPLICATION OF
THIS RULING This Ruling considers: |
|
2.1 |
|
|
2.2 |
|
|
2.3 |
|
| 3.0 | HOW THE TAX LAW
APPLIES |
|
3.1 |
Generally, where a false statement or false entry or deliberate omission of an entry is made in a return or in any books of account or other records maintained by or on behalf of any person, that person may be presumed to have made that false statement or false entry or deliberate omission with the intention to evade tax. |
|
3.2 |
Wilful evasion of tax means any action or deed deliberately performed or done with the purpose or intention of evading or assisting any other person to evade tax, and (without necessarily displacing or superseding the general meaning of this statement) would include any of the following: |
|
3.2.1 |
|
|
3.2.2 |
|
|
3.2.3 |
|
|
3.2.
4 |
|
|
3.2.5 |
|
|
3.2.6 |
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
3.3.1 |
|
|
3.3.2 |
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
3.4.1 |
|
|
3.4.2 |
|
|
3.5 |
Where the person making a return or the person giving assistance or advice in the preparation of a return adopts a position or takes a stand in respect of any provision of the Act: |
|
3.5.1 |
|
|
3.5.2 |
|
|
3.6 |
By way of illustration, the following examples indicate circumstances or situations where a person may be considered liable for prosecution for wilfully evading tax or assisting any person to evade tax or giving assistance or advice in the preparation of a return that results in the understatement of liability for tax of another person. [ The examples are not exhaustive and the title under each example is intended as a description only and should not be regarded as a classification of the type of offence .] Example 1 O mission of income Mr. A submits a duly completed return for year of assessment 2001 on his own behalf. He declares income from the carrying on of a restaurant business only. It is discovered during a tax audit that he has not declared his income from the business of selling imported gift items and souvenirs that he has been carrying on for the past 5 years. Mr. A may be liable for
prosecution for wilful evasion [section 114(1)] for omitting his income
from the business of selling imported gift items and souvenirs in his
return for the year of assessment 2001 and relevant preceding
years. The company may be liable for prosecution for wilful evasion [section 114(1)] or for making an incorrect return [section 113]. The director Mr. C may be liable for prosecution for assisting another person (the company) to evade tax by authorizing the preparation or maintenance of false books of account or other records [section 114(1)]. The accountant Mr. B may be
liable for prosecution for assisting another person (the company) to
evade tax by preparing or maintaining false books of account or other
records [section 114(1)].
The bookkeeper may be liable for prosecution for assisting in the preparation of Mr. C's return that results in the understatement of his liability for tax [section 114(1A)]. Mr. C may be liable for prosecution for making a false statement or entry in a return [section 114(1)] as well as for failure to keep sufficient records [section 82] [see Public Ruling No. 5/2000]. To avoid any inference of
dishonest intention, the bookkeeper should have made a disclosure in the
final accounts that they are prepared from incomplete records and that
figures shown in the final accounts which are not supported by proper
records or documents are based on reasonable estimates that are
justifiable or otherwise defensible either by the bookkeeper or Mr. C;
and, where appropriate, showing the basis for the estimates. Similarly,
Mr. C should have made such a disclosure in his tax computation. Failure
to make a disclosure on the part of either person may be regarded as
indicative of dishonest intention
. The company may be liable for prosecution for making a false claim in the return [section 114(1)] or for making an incorrect return [section 113]. No action should be taken
against the tax agent since he has performed his duties with reasonable
care by calling for the receipt and advising the company accordingly,
and the understatement arises primarily because of his reliance, in good
faith, upon the written confirmation given by the
company.
The company may be liable for prosecution for making a false claim in the return [section 114(1)] or for making an incorrect return [section 113]. The director of the company may be liable for prosecution for assisting in the preparation of a return that has resulted in the understatement of the company's liability for tax [section 114(1A)]. No action should be taken
against the tax agent as he has acted in good faith and the
understatement of the company's liability for tax essentially arises
from the misrepresentation on the part of the company's
director. The individual or his wife may be liable for prosecution for evasion of tax by deliberate omission of income in the return [section 114(1)]. No action should be taken
against the tax agent, as no inference of dishonest intention should be
drawn against him. Since the correct amount of tax is paid despite the error in the return, there should be no inference of dishonest intention. No action should, therefore, be taken against either the company or the firm. Both the company and the tax consultancy firm should have exercised care and diligence in checking and ensuring that the return is correctly completed. If settlement of tax had negligently been made on the basis of the incorrect figure, action may be considered against the company under section 113 for making an incorrect return. If there is evidence to indicate that the understatement is made other than innocently (for example, previous or subsequent incidences of a similar nature in the same case and / or a pattern of frequent occurrences of a similar nature in a number of other cases), then action may be considered against the tax consultancy firm under section 114(1A). |
| 3.7 |
A person who performs an action or deed wilfully and with intent to evade tax or assist any other person to evade tax may be liable for prosecution and, on conviction, is liable to a fine of not less than RM1,000 and not more than RM20,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to both, and as well as a special penalty of three times the amount of tax which has been undercharged or which would have been undercharged if the offence had not been detected. |
| 3.8 |
A person who assists in, or advises with respect to, the preparation of a return where the return results in an understatement of the liability for tax of another person may be liable for prosecution and, unless he satisfies the court that the assistance or advice was given with reasonable care, is liable to a fine of not less than RM2,000 and not more than RM20,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to both. |
| 4.0 |
INTERPRETATION For the purpose of this Ruling: |
|
4.1 |
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
4.3 |
|
|
4.4 |
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
4.7.1 |
"Examine" means, in
relation to a person who assists in, or advises with respect to, the
preparation of a return, to satisfy himself as to the appropriateness and
validity of such claims on the basis of such documents, analyses,
statements or other relevant information as certified or confirmed and
provided by the person on whose behalf the return is made or by any other
person acting for him . |
|
4.7.2 |
Specific claims for
deductions, allowances, reliefs or rebates" refer to claims
w
hich are required to be supported by documents such as prescribed
forms, certificates and receipts. |