GHY v Comptroller: Proving the Goods Behind GST Invoices

Key steps and distinctions

GHY sought S$1,341,557 in input-tax credits for purported Osperia SD cards and flash drives purchased locally and exported to Malaysian customers. The Board held that the appellant bore the legal burden under section 52(3) to show the disallowance was wrong. Invoices, testimony and package photographs supplied initial evidence, but serious contrary evidence required more: the goods could not be traced to their claimed source, the purported brand lacked a credible market presence, counterparties were elusive and the intermediary arrangement had no convincing commercial rationale. The appellant did not close those evidential gaps. Paying the invoiced price or purported GST does not itself create a right to input tax where the described supplies are not proved. The Comptroller did not need to establish a missing-trader fraud scheme or the appellant’s complicity to defeat this appeal. The absence of criminal prosecution was also not evidence that the claim was valid. The appeal was dismissed and S$60,000 inclusive costs awarded to the Comptroller. This judgment concerns proof of actual supplies under the applicable law and facts; it should not be described as a conviction of GHY for fraud. Preserve evidence that verifies the identity, origin and movement of the invoiced goods.