<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: ATO vs Symone Anstis case dispute continues..!!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.taxabull.com/2009/12/21/ato-vs-symone-anstis-round4/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.taxabull.com/2009/12/21/ato-vs-symone-anstis-round4/</link>
	<description>Australian Tax &#38; Accounting news. No BS.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Jun 2010 02:41:21 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: mark</title>
		<link>http://www.taxabull.com/2009/12/21/ato-vs-symone-anstis-round4/comment-page-1/#comment-49</link>
		<dc:creator>mark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 May 2010 09:33:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxabull.com/?p=394#comment-49</guid>
		<description>Leave was granted to the ATO (call me a synic,but i doubt it was ever not going to be granted)on friday 23 april 2010.
Even if the ATO were to lose the federal government would introduce retrospective legislation to deny claims because there is to much money at stake and they would argue that it was never the governments intention to have the deductions allowable &quot;in the spirit of the legislation&quot; that presently exists.
In any case it will be interesting to see if our learned friends on the high court interpret the existing legislation the way  the lower courts have until now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Leave was granted to the ATO (call me a synic,but i doubt it was ever not going to be granted)on friday 23 april 2010.<br />
Even if the ATO were to lose the federal government would introduce retrospective legislation to deny claims because there is to much money at stake and they would argue that it was never the governments intention to have the deductions allowable &#8220;in the spirit of the legislation&#8221; that presently exists.<br />
In any case it will be interesting to see if our learned friends on the high court interpret the existing legislation the way  the lower courts have until now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott</title>
		<link>http://www.taxabull.com/2009/12/21/ato-vs-symone-anstis-round4/comment-page-1/#comment-46</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 02:14:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxabull.com/?p=394#comment-46</guid>
		<description>Is there any way to know when the case will be heard in the High Court? Thanks for your coverage so far. I&#039;m keen to see the results of this case!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is there any way to know when the case will be heard in the High Court? Thanks for your coverage so far. I&#8217;m keen to see the results of this case!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
