Why the IRB? Why not just ask Zeti?

TTF: Dr Mahathir Mohamad is a vengeful freak.

On Monday, Malaysian’s got to know of some findings filed in 2015 (FIND PROOF HERE) by the current head of the MACC, Datuk Seri Mohd Shukri Abdull. Back then, Shukri was just the Deputy Head of the MACC and took his cues from Tan Sri Abu Kassim Mohamed. According to the findings, the RM2.6 billion that ended in Najib’s personal account was a gift from Saudi Arabia that Tan Sri Zeti Akhtar Aziz advised the former premier to lodge in his account. 

The expose more or less trashed Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s attempt to criminalise Najib by implying that the billions originated from 1MDB. The Prime Minister planned to drag investigations to a point where Malaysians would forget about Pakatan Harapan’s pledge to place Najib under lock and key. He is now on the edge seeing that the expose put the spotlight on Zeti and has her illuminated in some media circles.

So illuminated, he attempted to shift the conversation away from her by dragging the Yang di-Pertuan Agong through the mud. On Wednesday, he got A Kadir Jasin to viral a Microsoft Exel spreadsheet purporting to detail the ruler’s expenses. That very day, The Third Force shot Jasin’s RM250-odd billion estimate down by publishing the actual estimate of the Agong’s 2017 and 2018 expenditure (FIND PROOF HERE).

And that has Mahathir infuriated.

So infuriated, he’s seeking alternatives to frame Najib up as the man who made people suffer while living like a King. He’s is now getting the IRB to investigate if indeed the RM2.6 billion that ended in Najib’s account should have been taxed by the Government of Malaysia (see news item below). Question is, does that not automatically imply that Tan Sri Zeti Akhtar Aziz may well be a criminal?

I mean, did Shukri not concede that the former Bank Negara Governor knew the identity of the donor and sanctioned the RM2.6 billion transfers? Did he not admit that it was Zeti who told Najib to have the money channeled into his personal account on the basis of it being a gift? Is the IRB not going to call on Zeti to discover if she told Shukri a lie or if the MACC chief fabricated the “Kertas siasatan terhadap Najib Razak?”

Malaysia baru, anyone?

PUTRAJAYA: Inland Revenue Board (IRB) says the RM2.6 billion allegedly received by former Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak is now subject to further examination.

Its chief executive officer, Datuk Seri Sabin Samitah, said in light of the disclosure by the current chief of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Datuk Seri Shukri Abdull and ongoing investigations pertaining to all issues related to 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB), the tax treatment for the said RM2.6 billion that was decided on Feb 16, 2016, was now subject to further examination.

On Feb 16, 2016, based on the findings made by the agencies that had been given the task to investigate the said RM2.6 billion, the amount received was found to be a donation payment and voluntary in nature and as such has no income characteristics, he said.

Therefore, he said pursuant to the general principles of taxation with respect to such voluntary payment, it was not an income which is subject to tax under the Income Tax Act 1967.

“A voluntary payment may change in character and be subject to tax if it is given repetitiously, as consideration for services rendered, in return for any benefit of any kind or the amount is used in a business activity in order to sustain business operations,” he said in a statement today following the recent developments on the amount of RM2.6 billion received by the former premier, as well as cash and other valuable items recently seized from his residence and other premises.

Sabin said in the process of ascertaining the true nature of the payment, the IRB would work closely with all agencies and the newly formed task forces that were involved in the 1MDB related investigation.

With regard to the seizure of cash and valuables, Sabin said a notice under section 78 and 79 of the Income Tax Act 1967 would be issued by the Director-General of Inland Revenue to individuals connected to the items seized.

He said the purpose of the notice was to ascertain whether sufficient disclosure of income had been made to the IRB that commensurate with the assets (cash and valuables) owned by a particular individual.

“In the event of an unexplained wealth, additional tax will be raised together with penalty of a maximum of double the amount of tax under-declared. Failure by a person to comply with the notice within the specified time is an offence and can be prosecuted under the Income Tax Act 1967,” he said.

Source: NST Online

Comments

Comments