The proper tax treatment of real property disposals is a common area of dispute between taxpayers and the Inland Revenue Board (Revenue). Taxpayers who have disposed of investment properties expect to be taxed under the Real Property Gains Tax Act 1976 (RPGTA). The Revenue, on its part, may disagree, taking the view that the taxpayer had been trading and ought to be taxed (at the higher rate) under the Income Tax Act 1967 (ITA).

The Shipping Law Updates is a publication by our Regional Shipping Group which marshals legal expertise, industry insight, and commercial acumen in the fields of maritime and trade from the diverse talent pool of specialist lawyers at the Rajah & Tann Asia offices. The publication provides a snapshot of the key legal, regulatory, case law and industry developments in the region that have an impact on the shipping industry and your operations.    

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Kumar Kanagasingam Senior Partner

Banking & Insolvency E: [email protected]

Sean Yeow Huang-Meng Partner

Banking & Insolvency E: [email protected]

Andrew Chiew Ean Vooi Partner

COVID-19 Crisis

COVID-19 continued to take its toll on the Malaysian economy in 2021.

On 12 November 2021, Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM) reported that Malaysia's economy contracted 4.5% year-on-year in the third quarter of 2021. This comes after a 5.6% contraction of Malaysia's GDP in 2020, which was the second worst contraction since the Asian financial crisis in 1998.

Example: A obtains judgment against B and C for RM500,000. Are B and C liable to equal proportions of the judgment sum, i.e., RM250,000 each, or are they each liable for RM500,000?

This distinction between "joint liability" and "joint and several liability" was recently clarified by the Federal Court.

Brief facts

Introduction

Commercial transactions and disputes are increasingly likely to contain a cross-border element. As such, the ability of Courts to cooperate on the management of proceedings that span their respective jurisdictions will facilitate the efficient resolution of cross-border issues. In this regard, the Singapore and Malaysia Courts have demonstrated a commitment to judicial cooperation between the two countries.

Rabindra S Nathan, Shearn Delamore & Co

This is an extract from the 2022 edition of GRR's the Asia-Pacific Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.

In summary

Introduction

Without a doubt, a scheme of arrangement is a preferred corporate rescue mechanism for a company in financial distress. It allows the management of a company to retain control while carrying out an approved debt restructuring compromise or arrangement with creditors of the company. The ultimate goal is to restructure the debts of the company in a manner acceptable to at least 75% of its creditors in value so that the company can continue as a going concern.

In a relationship between a creditor and debtor, the issue of liability is always a cause of concern. This is made even more apparent when there is more than one debtor involved as the terms of liability is not necessarily clear. Among the popular issues of contention is whether the debtors’ liability is joint or joint and several. In this commentary, we will explore this artificial distinction through the recent Federal Court case of Lembaga Kumpulan Wang Simpanan Pekerja v. Edwin Cassian Nagappan @ Marie [2021] 1 LNS 928.