Central Park Estate (Vic) Pty Ltd v Commissioner of State Revenue  VSC 1
On 6 March 2012, the Taxpayer entered into a contract for the purchase of a property in Dromana used as a wine making facility. On that same day, the Taxpayer also entered into an inter-dependent contract with a related company of the Vendor for the purchase of equipment situated on the property. The Commissioner assessed the Taxpayer for duty on the aggregated dutiable value of the land and equipment. The Taxpayer claimed the equipment consisted of goods held or used in connection with primary production, and were therefore non-dutiable under section 10(1)(d)(iv) of the Duties Act.
On 23 January 2018, the Supreme Court held that the equipment was not exempt. For s10(1)(d)(iv) to apply, primary production has to occur on the subject land itself. Also, the equipment has to be used directly in connection with that primary production activity. Both requirements were not satisfied in this case.