KUCHING: Sarawak United People’s Party (SUPP) has welcomed the Kuala Lumpur High Court’s recent decision on granting Baleh Hydro Power Generation Sdn Bhd’s judicial review application to challenge the Ministry of Finance’s (MoF) rejection of its RM10.9 billion 2019 investment tax allowance claim.
SUPP Women Chief Kho Teck Wan said the subsidiary of Sarawak Energy Berhad (SEB) had applied to MoF, to claim the investment tax allowance, amounting to RM10.9 million, a type of tax incentive granted based on the capital expenditure a company incurs on approved projects.
However, it was rejected by the then Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng in 20919 without any reason.
“I am shocked to learn of such news. We would not know of such unfair treatment by Lim on Sarawak company if not for the case of Baleh Hydro. So, kudos to Baleh Hydro for challenging the former Financial Minister’s decision,” she said in a statement today.
Kho said she also would like to question Sarawak DAP leaders on their stand regarding the case and the High Court’s decision.
On Aug 4, High Court Judge Datuk Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh dismissed the MoF’s decision to reject the claim and granted the judicial review.
According to Baleh Hydro’s application, then Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng had rejected the company’s application without providing any reason, although the company claimed it had met all the required conditions.
In his affirmed affidavit in response to the Baleh Hydro’s claim, which named the Finance Ministry as the respondent, Lim said the hydroelectric project was not a project of national importance.
In allowing the judicial review, the High Court Judge accepted Baleh Hydro’s counsel S Saravana Kumar’s submission that Lim’s decision should be deemed erroneous since the company had met all the conditions it needed for the tax incentive.
The judge also accepted the claimant’s argument that the finance minister does not enjoy unfettered discretion in deciding whether to approve a company’s tax incentive application.
He also concurred with Baleh Hydro’s arguments that Lim had failed to provide reasons for his decision, which gave rise to the inference that the minister had no good reason for rejecting its claim.
