Ismail Sabri's former son-in-law declared bankrupt
Senior assistant registrar Faisal Zulkifli made the ruling during today's proceedings after allowing a creditor's petition filed by Cekap Air Sdn Bhd on Nov 20 last year.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Malaysiakini
4 hours ago
- Malaysiakini
Vape bans: Slippery slope for legal governance
LETTER | In July 2024, the High Court ruled that the Kedah state government's move to ban gaming licences, effectively shutting down Sports Toto operations in the state, was unconstitutional. The court found that state authorities had overstepped their powers by refusing to renew licences issued under federal law, thereby infringing on the rights of a legally licensed business and violating the Federal Constitution. This landmark ruling is more than just a win for the gaming industry; it underscores a critical principle: state governments cannot override federal law at will. Yet just months later, we are seeing the same pattern emerge again, this time with the vape industry. Kedah has announced it will no longer renew licences for vape-related businesses, with the goal of a complete ban by 2026. Other states such as Pahang, Terengganu and Perlis are following suit. This trend raises urgent questions about the balance of power in our federal system. What started with gaming licences is now extending to vape. Tomorrow, will it be food and beverages? Or wellness and lifestyle services? If states are allowed to selectively shut down federally regulated sectors, Malaysia risks descending into legal fragmentation, where trade and commerce depend more on local politics than national law. Act 852: A necessary legal anchor Rather than allowing states to adopt unilateral bans, the federal government must focus on fully enforcing Control of Smoking Products for Public Health Act 2024 (Act 852) across the country. Act 852 was passed after years of consultation and debate. It represents a balanced and structured approach to regulating smoking and vaping products, protecting youth, ensuring product safety, and reducing public health risks while allowing regulated access to adults. Its successful enforcement is not just a health issue; it is a legal imperative. If states are allowed to disregard it through political or moralistic motivations, the Act's legitimacy will be compromised. From a legal standpoint, only a consistent, centralised framework can ensure that public health regulations are enforced uniformly, fairly, and in accordance with constitutional principles. Legal uncertainty hurts rule of law, public confidence One of the hallmarks of a sound legal system is predictability. Businesses, consumers, and civil society should be able to rely on a stable set of laws and policies. When that stability is undermined by states choosing to selectively ban certain industries, it weakens the rule of law and opens the door for selective enforcement, politicisation of trade, and judicial overload from legal disputes. This also affects the very communities the bans claim to protect. Instead of driving behaviour change, bans often push products into illicit channels, where there is no age restriction, no safety oversight, and no taxation. This undermines the public health objectives of Act 852 and increases enforcement burdens. The way forward: Uphold the law, not politicise it The lesson from the Sports Toto ruling is clear: state governments do not have the authority to override federal laws with blanket bans. Vape should not be the next legal battleground. The federal government must assert the supremacy of laws passed by Parliament and ensure that public health policies are governed by national interest, not fragmented by state agendas. Act 852 provides the legal tools to regulate the vape industry effectively. What's needed now is not more bans but better enforcement. Malaysia must decide whether it wants to be governed by clear laws or discretionary bans. The answer will determine whether our legal system continues to uphold constitutional order or gives way to a patchwork of conflicting state policies. The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.
The Star
3 days ago
- The Star
TNB receives additional RM840.13mil tax bill for YA2022
KUALA LUMPUR: Tenaga Nasional Bhd (TNB) has received a notice of additional assessment from the Inland Revenue Board (IRB) for the year of assessment (YA) 2022 amounting to RM840.13mil, it said in stock exchange filing today. The energy utility said it received the notice on July 24, 2025, and - given the Federal Court's decision pertaining to a similar notice of additional assessment it received for YA 2018 - it is currently evaluating its available legal options. "This evaluation takes into consideration that TNB has already submitted an application for Investment Allowance under Schedule 7B of the Income Tax Act 1967 (including those for YA 2022) to the Minister of Finance," it said. Earlier this month, the Federal Court ruled in favour of the IRB concerning an additional tax assessment for the financial year ended December 2018. The court overturned earlier High Court and Court of Appeal decisions that had favoured TNB, reinstating a tax bill initially set at RM1.81bil, which was reduced to RM1.25bil after a penalty remission in December 2020. On July 22, 2025, the High Court granted leave to TNB, through its subsidiary TNB Western Energy Bhd, to commence judicial review against the Inland Revenue Board (IRB) in relation to a tax assessment totalling RM291.6mil for the financial year ended December 2018. TNB said in a stock exchange filing it was also granted an interim stay of all further proceedings, including the enforcement of the assessment notice, until the disposal of the substantive hearing. The High Court scheduled a case management on Aug 5 for further directions.
Borneo Post
3 days ago
- Borneo Post
High Court sets aside travel ban on company directors in GST refund case
The court found that the Customs Department acted unlawfully in issuing a notice under Section 49 of the GST Act 2014 to prevent the directors from leaving Malaysia. – Photo by Chimon Upon KUCHING (July 25): The High Court here has ruled in favour of three company directors, setting aside a travel ban imposed on them by the Royal Malaysian Customs Department in connection with a disputed Goods and Services Tax (GST) refund. The court found that the Customs Department acted unlawfully in issuing a notice under Section 49 of the GST Act 2014 to prevent the directors from leaving Malaysia. The ban was imposed despite the fact that the alleged tax liability was owed by the company, not the directors personally, and the company remains solvent and in operation. The case stemmed from a GST refund initially approved and paid to the company in 2018. In 2020, following a second audit, Customs demanded repayment of RM1.68 million and later issued a travel ban in 2023 without notifying the directors directly. The directors only learned of the restriction days later. In its decision, the court held that the legal conditions under Sections 49 and 53 of the GST Act were not satisfied. It ruled that personal liability could only arise if the company was insolvent and its assets insufficient to cover the tax liability – circumstances that did not exist in this case. The court further found that the failure to serve the travel ban notice directly to the individuals, as required under Section 49(3), constituted a breach of procedural fairness and natural justice. The judicial review was allowed, and the court ordered the travel ban to be lifted. Costs of RM8,000 were awarded to the applicants. This case highlights the importance of adhering to legal safeguards when enforcing tax recovery measures and reinforces the protection of individual rights under administrative law. The company directors are represented by Adrian Lee Chew and Chan Yin Xi of Battenberg & Talma, assisted by Lam Kam Wing and Toh Yong Lai of JK Tax Services Sdn Bhd. GST refund Kuching travel ban
