Role of the ATO as an Executive Body-Free-Samples-Myassignment

Question: What is the role of the ATO as an executive body? Does it make law? How does this case reflect the interaction of the different bodies under the separation of powers doctrine? What is the significance of the High Court decision in terms of tax law as it is applied within Australia? Answer: Issue In this case scenario main issue is superseding power of High court and role of ATO regarding the case scenario of Ms Anstis. Legal Provisions The ATO as an executive body plays a vital role in developing overall strategic direction and evaluates delivery of commitments to the government and community. It mainly emphasizes on matter which are related to direction and positioning of organisation. ATOs role comprises effectively managing and providing shape to the tax and superannuation system so that it could support and fund services for Australians in appropriate manner[1]. Further, while playing this role ATO administer the tax law and main variants of superannuation law so that appropriate guidance or advice can be provided to Treasury for supporting and development of tax legislative measures. A proposed law or amendment of existing law can be introduced into parliament in form of a Bill. It is necessary for a Bill to receive approval from both the houses of parliament in identical form and then the same is presented to the Governor General for royal assent. Thus, ATO is not having power to make law. However it is responsible for putting government programs and law into effect and even for delegation of legislation[2]. The key roles which have been carried by then in procedure of law making comprise: Ascertaining the requirement of new law Preparing the draft of Bill The manner in which law should be presented in order to attain the needed results. Reassessment comments and views provided by committee and making changes it its accordance. The power to make and mange federal law has been distributed in three groups: Parliament, Executive and Judiciary. The same has been done in order to avoid providing all power to one group and each group is responsible for working in the defined areas so that a check on others work can be done in appropriate manner. Applicability In present case of Ms Anstis in which claim of deduction was denied by ATO and further the appeal regarding the case was made to High Court. High Court dismissed the decision of ATC and took decision that as expenses were incurred in gaining of youth allowance and were not of domestic nature; thus the same will be part of general deductions. From above analysis it can be assessed that the upper authority reassess the complete case and the decision provided by him overrule the decision taken by all the authorities previously[3]. This shows that the High Court is the ultimate court available for appeal in Australian judicial system. It can be said that the decision of high court is still law in case the circumstance are same when that decision was taken. As, it is having a vital role in law making as when it interprets provision of the constitution or statue it provides settled new fact scenario to settled law. A decision of a judge in a State Supreme Court is binding on the all similar case which have been appealed in State court but not on a judge in Federal Court or Supreme Court. It has been specified in Section 75(v) of the specified constitution that Federal officials are not required to exceed their authority and requires Federal judiciary relating to High Court and officers of Commonwealth to take action in accordance with law. Conclusion High Court of Australia is the highest court in Australia Judicial system. The main function of High Court is to interpret and apply law of Australia for the purpose taking decision whether legislation meet its requirement or not. High court is authorized to hear appeals from Federal, State and Territory Courts. It is necessary that each appeal should be applied. It is the last court of appeal in Australia and decision made by it are binding on all other courts in Australia[4]. Each justice in case makes own decision and written reasons are provided in same[5]. Decision made by high court have influence the changing relationship between the States and Federal Governments. The significance can be explained by one of the decision which was concluded by high court in case of Commissioner of Taxation v Stone[6]. The case was first provided to the Federal Court Single Court Decision than to II Full Court of The Federal Court Decision and finally to High court as the appellate was not sati sfied with the decision taken by previous court. High court took an unanimous decision in this case and clarified the activities in relation to athletes with constituted as carrying on business and further represented as taxable income and the same was accepted by both the parties Bibliography O'Brien, Sarah. "Good governance."Superfunds Magazine413 2016, p 29. Campbell, Tom D., and Jeffrey Goldsworthy, eds.Judicial power, democracy and legal positivism. Routledge, 2017. Carpenter, Daniel.Reputation and power: organizational image and pharmaceutical regulation at the FDA. Princeton University Press, 2014. Chris Davies, THE HIGH COURT DECISION IN COMMISIONER OF TAXATION V STONE AND ITS IMPACT ON SPORT IN AUSTRALIA, 2005, (Online). Available through [Accessed on 20th August 2017] Davis, Richard, and David Taras, eds. Justices and Journalists. Cambridge University Press, 2017. Nonet, Philippe. Law and society in transition: Toward responsive law. Routledge, 2017 O'Brien, Sarah. "Good governance."Superfunds Magazine413 2016, p 29 O'Brien, Sarah. "Good governance."Superfunds Magazine413 2016, p 29. Campbell, Tom D., and Jeffrey Goldsworthy, eds.Judicial power, democracy and legal positivism. Routledge, 2017. Carpenter, Daniel.Reputation and power: organizational image and pharmaceutical regulation at the FDA. Princeton University Press, 2014. Davis, Richard, and David Taras, eds. Justices and Journalists. Cambridge University Press, 2017. Nonet, Philippe. Law and society in transition: Toward responsive law. Routledge, 2017. Chris Davies, THE HIGH COURT DECISION IN COMMISIONER OF TAXATION V STONE AND ITS IMPACT ON SPORT IN AUSTRALIA, 2005, (Online). Available through [Accessed on 20th August 2017]