With the next Federal Election expected in May, there are currently several pending bills in the Parliament introduced by the Coalition Government (Coalition).

 We reported on the Full Federal Court decision of Satyam Computer Services Limited v CoT (2018) [2018] FCAFC 172 (Satyam) here.

In Deputy Commissioner of Taxation v Pedley (No 2) (2018) FCA 2015 (Pedley), the Federal Court confirmed the wide discretion available to the Australian Taxation Office’s (ATO) to allocate payments made to it for tax debts especially where the taxpayer has not provided explicit direction as to what payments should be applied to which debts.

The High Court in Commissioner of Taxation v Tomaras & Ors (2018) HCA 62 (Tomaras) has confirmed the Federal Circuit Court had jurisdiction to make orders altering the property interests of parties to a marriage substituting one party for the other party as sole debtor to the Commissioner of Taxation (Commissioner) in respect of income tax liabilities owed by the first party.

On 27 November 2018, McKerracher J of the Federal Court handed down his decision in Burton v CoT (2018) FCA 1857 (Burton).

On 11 October 2018, the Full Federal Court in Satyam Computer Services Limited v CoT (2018) held the ‘source’ rule in Article 23 of the Australia–India Double Taxation Agreement (Indian DTA) prevailed over the domestic definition such that payments from Australia to a company in India for work performed in India was taxable in Australia.