Abstract
In this article, the author examines the outcome in the recent Australian High Court case, Bywater Investments Ltd v. Commissioner of Taxation; Hua Wang Bank Berhad v. Commissioner of Taxation, and contrasts it with earlier court decisions on the meaning of central management and control to ascertain whether the Bywater decision is a major step forward in jurisprudence determining the place of corporate residence, or merely a reaffirmation of the approach taken in the earlier cases. The article also canvasses evidentiary matters concerning the independence of board decision making and the meaning of carrying on a business in the context of passive investment entities.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
