SAC v Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri 一案中，所得税特别委员会（SCIT）的裁决，引发了有关政部长根据1967年所得税法令（Income Tax Act 1967，简称 ITA）第127(3A) 条授予税务豁免权的适用范围、土地认购选择权（call option）的法律性质，以及税务机关是否可以事后重新诠释税务优惠条件等重要法律问题。 本案的核心争议在于：纳税人在2016课税年度（YA 2016）所取得的认购选择权费，是否属于财政部长根据第127(3A)条所授予税务豁免范围内的“源自土地权利处置所得的法定收入”。 SCIT裁定，纳税人所收取的认购选择权费属于财政部长依据《所得税法令》第127(3A) 条所授予税务优惠的适用范围, 因此可享有所得税豁免。 纳税人由本所税务、销售与服务税（SST）及关税（Customs）合伙人 S. Saravana Kumar 与 Nur Amira Ahmad Azhar，以及高级律师 Nur Hanina Mohd Azham 成功代理。 法定框架：所得

马来西亚将从 2026 年 1 月 1 日 起对其印花税框架进行全面改革，标志着向自我评估制度 (Self-Assessment) 的转型，并加强执法力度，这是更广泛的税务行政改革的一部分。 有关修订是根据《2025 年财政法案》和《2025 年税收征收、管理与执行措施法案》制定，《1949 年印花税法》(Stamp Act 1949) 作出修订，全面改变了印花税的评估、缴纳及执行方式。 印花税自我评估制度 (Stamp Duty Self-Assessment System (SDSAS)) 在修订之前，马来西亚的印花税运作于官方评估制度。在该制度下，纳税人必须通过印花税评估及缴付系统（STAMPS）将应课税文书提交给印花税征收官（Collector）进行裁定、估值、发出评估通知及缴费。这使得确定印花税的主要责任落在税务机关身上，而非纳税人。 从 2026 年 1 月 1 日起，将转向 SDSAS。纳税人需负责自行评估、申报，并通过 MyTax 门户网站的 e-Duti Setem (e-DS) 平台缴纳正确金额的印花税。

Last Friday, the High Court allowed the judicial review application filed by Yakult (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd (Company) and set aside the Customs’ decision to reclassify the “Yakult Ace” and “Yakult Ace Light” (Products) drinks manufactured by the company from fermented milk products to beverages. The High Court held that the Products should properly fall under tariff code 0403.90.9000 as “other fermented or acidified milk” as opposed to under tariff code 2202.99.5000 as “other non-

The High Court has dismissed an appeal by the Inland Revenue Board (IRB), affirming a decision of the Special Commissioners of Income Tax (SCIT) that a RM 1.4 million call option fee received by a taxpayer was exempt from income tax under a special tax incentive package granted by the Minister of Finance (MOF). The taxpayer was successfully represented by the firm’s Tax, SST & Customs Partner, S. Saravana Kumar together with Senior Associate, Nur Hanina Mohd Azham. This r

The Customs Appeal Tribunal (Tribunal) has delivered a significant decision on tariff classification, ruling that a tobacco manufacturer's cigarillo products were correctly classified under Tariff Code 2402.10.0000 as cigarillos containing tobacco, and not under Tariff Code 2402.20.9000 as cigarettes containing tobacco as contended by the Royal Malaysian Customs Department (Customs). Beyond the immediate classification issue, the decision is noteworthy for two broader princ

The global investment landscape is undergoing a profound shift. For decades, countries competed primarily on low labour costs, tax incentives and manufacturing capacity. Today, investors are increasingly prioritising policy stability, skilled talent, innovation ecosystems and strategic partnerships capable of supporting long-term growth. Across Southeast Asia, competition for high-value investment is intensifying. Economies that succeed in the next industrial cycle will not

Recently, the Special Commissioners of Income Tax (SCIT) in PSB v KPHDN ruled in favour of the taxpayer and held that the Inland Revenue Board (Revenue) cannot, in the absence of clear statutory authority, reconstruct a transaction to arrive at a more favourable tax outcome. Particularly, the SCIT held that where shares are disposed of in a single transaction for a single consideration, the Revenue has no power to apportion the disposal price. The SCIT further clarified tha

Recently, the High Court allowed the taxpayer’s appeal against the decision of the Special Commissioners of Income Tax (SCIT) and held that the capital expenditure incurred on petrol station canopies and lighting qualifies as plant for the purposes of capital allowances under Schedule 3 of the Income Tax Act 1967 (ITA). Brief Facts The taxpayer is in the retail and marketing of petroleum products through petrol stations across Malaysia. The taxpayer incurred capital expen

近日，上诉庭一致裁定允许一名纳税人的上诉，确认其可就为兴建高尔夫球场及休闲设施所支出的 1 亿4,100万令吉资本开支可申索资本津贴。 背景 该纳税人在柔佛经营一家高尔夫及休闲俱乐部。于2010课税年度（YA 2010），纳税人就兴建以下项目产生资本开支, 统称为“争议项目”： 高尔夫球场（包括排水系统、草皮及铺设工程、土地成本、维修工坊、高尔夫球车充电站、球袋站、球童站及其他附带费用） 游泳池 儿童戏水池 健身房 两个网球场 乒乓球室 儿童游乐区 更衣室 毛巾站及洗手间 多功能室 餐饮场所 阅读室 健康中心 专卖店及运动用品店 所得税特别委员会（SCIT）及高等法院均不允许纳税人就上述争议项目申索资本津贴，理由是依赖上诉庭在 Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri v Resort Poresia Sdn Bhd (2015) MSTC 30-090 一案中的裁决，该案曾裁定高尔夫球场属于营业场所，因此不符合“厂房及机器”（plant and machinery）的定义。 高等法院在本案中亦补充指出，只有在少

RDS is pleased to publish RDS Legal Insight Q1 of 2026. This quarterly magazine features the following articles by our colleagues: 6) Global Minimum Tax (Pillar Two): Implementation in Malaysia by Amira Ahmad Azhar & Dharshini Sharmaa

Recently, the High Court in CMSB v KPHDN delivered an important ruling on the tax treatment of interest income arising from instalment sales. The Court held that such charges should be treated as business income under Section 4(a) of the Income Tax Act 1967 (ITA) rather than as interest income under Section 4(c). The dispute centred on the proper interpretation of Section 24(5) of the ITA, in particular whether the two limbs of the provision operate disjunctively and how t

The rapid growth of the social media economy has transformed online influence into a viable profession. In response, the Inland Revenue Board of Malaysia (IRB) issued a new guideline on 14 January 2026 clarifying the income tax treatment of earnings derived from influencer activities. The guidelines aim to assist taxpayers and administrators in interpreting the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act 1967 (ITA) in the context of digital content creation and social media

Mesra Retail & Cafe Sdn Bhd v Pemungut Duti Setem, Malaysia 一案中，高庭就一份更替协议（Novation Agreement）在《1949年印花税法令》（Stamp Act 1949，简称“SA”）下应如何征收印花税作出裁决。争议焦点在于，该协议应根据附表一第4项征收10令吉的固定印花税，抑或根据附表一第32(a)项征收从价印花税。 案件的关键争议在于，该更替安排是否构成SA第16(1)条意义下的财产转让（conveyance or transfer），或仅是终止原有合同项下的权利与义务，并以新的合同关系取而代之。 本案纳税人由本所税务、消费税与关税合伙人 S. Saravana Kumar 及高级律师 Nur Hanina Mohd Azham 代表出庭并成功抗辩。 事实背景 Petronas Dagangan Berhad（PDB）为多间油站及相关设施的业主。PDB曾与 Golden Scoop Sdn Bhd（Golden Scoop）签订多项营运协议，允许 Golden Sc

For companies operating in Malaysia’s Free Zones, the perception of a “duty-free” environment often obscures a far more complex regulatory reality. While these zones allow goods to move without immediate customs duties, they exist within a tightly monitored legal framework overseen by the Royal Malaysian Customs Department and the Malaysian Border Control and Protection Agency (MCBA). Enforcement is neither theoretical nor rare. In February 2026, authorities intercepted two

马来西亚上诉庭近日就关联公司贷款豁免的税务处理问题作出一项具有里程碑意义的裁决，明确确立：在纳税人此前未就相关负债申报税务扣除的情况下，债务获豁免并不构成应税收入。 该案 Multi-Purpose Credit Sdn Bhd v Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri [2025] CLJU 2453 不仅厘清了《1967年所得税法令》（Income Tax Act 1967，下称“ITA”）第30(4)条与第4(a)条之间的适用关系，更在原则层面重申了税收法定原则，对企业集团融资安排及资本结构重整具有深远影响。 本案纳税人由本所税务、SST与关税业务部门合伙人 S. Saravana Kumar 先生，联同陈珈桦律师 （Tan Jia Hua） 代表出庭并成功抗辩。 案件核心：债务豁免是否属于“营业所得”？ 本案争议源于纳税人作为一家从事信贷租赁、分期付款及一般贷款融资业务的公司，在其日常经营过程中向关联公司借入约7,800万令吉。随后，相关关联公司决定豁免该笔贷款。内陆税收局（IRB）在税务审计过程中认为，纳税

In a recent decision which was reverberated across boardrooms and tax department alike, the Court of Appeal in OCP v Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri held that the fees received by Independent Non-Executive Directors (INEDs) do not constitute employment income under the Income Tax Act 1967 (ITA). Instead, the court held that such income fell within the scope of business income. The taxpayer in this appeal was successfully represented by the firm’s Tax, SST & Customs partne

The decision of the Special Commissioners of Income Tax (SCIT) in SAC v Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri raises important questions concerning the scope of ministerial tax exemptions under Section 127(3A) of the Income Tax Act 1967 (ITA), the legal character of call options over land and the limits of administrative reinterpretation of incentive conditions. At its core, the dispute concerned whether the Call Option Fee received by the taxpayer in the Year of Assessment (Y

Recently, the Court of Appeal upheld the stay of proceedings granted by the High Court in Winning Paramount Sdn Bhd v Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri (2025) MSTC ¶30-815, effectively suspending enforcement of additional assessments amounting to approximately RM86 million. The decision reinforces that notwithstanding the “pay first, dispute later” framework of the Income Tax Act 1967 (ITA), courts can intervene to prevent undue hardship while a judicial review is underway.

The Finance Act 2025, enacted alongside the Measures for the Collection, Administration and Enforcement of Tax Act 2025, marks a further step in the government’s effort to broaden the tax base, reduce interpretative uncertainty and strengthen enforcement. Many of the measures take effect from 1.1.2026. Taken together, the reforms signal a shift away from ambiguity-driven tax planning towards a framework where compliance discipline, documentation and transaction characterisa

Malaysia will introduce sweeping reforms to its stamp duty framework from 1 January 2026, marking a decisive shift towards self-assessment and tougher enforcement as part of broader tax administration reforms. The changes, enacted under the Finance Act 2025 and the Measures for the Collection, Administration and Enforcement of Tax Act 2025, amend the Stamp Act 1949 and significantly alter how stamp duty is assessed, paid and enforced. Stamp Duty Self-Assessment System (SD