3. On 6 September 2024, the SRO issued Reassessment Notices as follows:

1. On 6 September 2024, the SRO also issued Vacant Residential Land Tax Notices as follows:

Vacant Residential Land Tax Assessment Notice Year

1. On 4 November 2024, the applicant filed submissions with the SRO objecting to:
   • Notices of valuation - Land Tax Reassessment Notices for Assessment numbers -

38698871, 43488419, 53166263, 62026373, 72949400

• Notices of valuation - Vacant Residential Land Tax Assessment Notices for Assessment numbers - 79612101 79612062 79612038 79611993.

1. On 25 March 2025, the applicant emailed VCAT enclosing:

'an application for review in relation to the deemed decision of the Commissioner of State Revenue that no adjustment in the valuations is justified.'

2. On the same day, 25 March 2025, the applicant was advised by the Tribunal that the application could not be accepted in the format provided and directions were given to file the application via LV Hub.
3. On 27 March 2025, the applicant responded to the Tribunal as follows:

I created an online account and proceeded to make an application for review. However, the online application formatting did not provide for requesting a waiver of the fee where the agency made no decision. It also did not provide for a consolidated application where there are multiple notices of valuations issued in respect of more than one property. I also note that the online application makes no reference to the newly legislated vacant residential land tax. > > Consequently, I have lodged an online application for review of the 2020 Land Tax Reassessment Notice (Assessment No. 38698871) and the Notice of Decision of 26 August 2024 from the delegate of the Commissioner of State Revenue (Case No. HUBAPP23350). > > The application for review is made in respect of the valuation of the property at 269 North Road, Caulfield South (value date: 1 January 2019), as per the online application. > > If VCAT finds that the 2020 Land Tax Reassessment Notice is invalid, it follows that the 2020 Vacant Residential Land Tax Notice and the assessments issued for the years 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024 in respect of the subject properties are also invalid. > > I have paid the applicable fee ($960.20) and, subject to any findings by VCAT, I shall apply for a refund or costs at the close of proceedings. > > I also apply for consolidation of the online application for review (once it is accepted by VCAT) with the application for review of the FOI decision lodged on 25 March 2025, for which I am awaiting acknowledgement of acceptance.

4. The application lodged on the 27 March 2025 specified that the decision for review was a deemed decision by the valuer, that no adjustment in the valuation was justified, following an objection lodged on 4 November 2024.
5. The applicant relied upon the ground of review under s 17a) of the VL Act that the value assigned is incorrect[3]. The Capital Improved Value (CIV) by the valuer was $870,000 (at the relevant date), the applicant contends a CIV of $0.

1. The reasons for the application are as follows:

On 4 November 2024, the Applicant lodged with the State Revenue Office (SRO): (a) Objection to Notices of Valuation - Land Tax Reassessment Notices (Assessment Nos. 38698871, 43488419, 53166263, 62026373, 72949400); (b) Objection to Notices of Valuation - Vacant Residential Land Tax Assessment Notices (Assessment nos. 79612101, 79612062, 79612038, 79611993); and (c) Submissions in support of the Objections under s.16(1) of the Valuation of Land Act 1960. The Objections included an objection to the Land Tax Reassessment Notice (Assessment Nos. 38698871) and the Notice of Decision from the delegate of the Commissioner of State Revenue of 26 August 2024, which are the subject of the application for review by VCAT. In addition to providing reasons for decisions in the Notice of Decision, the delegate advised the Applicant as follows: "This investigation has considered all your circumstances. If you feel these assessments are incorrect you can lodge a written objection within 60 days of the date of your assessment notice. If you lodge an objection, you must provide full and detailed reasons challenging the legal basis of the assessments and highlighting the particular aspects of the assessment that you consider are incorrect. You must provide all the facts, arguments and documentation relevant to your objection". > > The assessment notices were subsequently issued on 6 September 2024 and the Applicant duly lodged the Objections. In his Submissions, the Applicant contended that the notices of valuations could not stand on the grounds that the assessments are incorrect and/or invalid. The Applicant listed 9 grounds for objection and a further 5 errors of a jurisdictional character that infected the Notice of Decision. The Submissions lacked information regarding the methodology used by the SRO in making the assessments, notwithstanding legal argument that the assessments were not authorised under the Land Tax Act 2005 and, therefore, invalid. The Applicant had requested access to his file under the FOI Act for the Objection but the request was refused on the basis that the documents and information contained therein were exempt from release under the FOI Act. Since no determination of the Applicant's Objection was made within the statutory period of 4 months after receiving the Objection, the SRO is deemed to have made a decision that no adjustment in the assessments is justified. Accordingly, the Notice of Decision of 26 August 2024 and the assessments are unvaried and are the subject of review by VCAT. > > The Applicant has also lodged concurrently an application for review in relation to the FOI decision and applies for the applications for review to be consolidated for hearing and appeal purposes. The Applicant advises that the offer of settlement made under ss.16(3A) and (3B) of the Valuation of Land Act 1960 in full settlement of the Objection lapsed under the terms of the offer following the deemed decision.

2. The application was made on 27 March 2025 by Michel Priestley (applicant) seeking review of the CIV of 269 North Road, Caulfield South (subject property) at the relevant date of 1 January 2019 (relevant date).
3. On 6 May 2025, the Acting Deputy Registrar rejected the application under s 71 of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 (Vic) (VCAT Act) because the application did not otherwise comply with the Act, regulations or rules.
4. On 12 March 2025[4], the applicant requested the application be reinstated on the grounds of jurisdictional error.
5. On 14 May 2025, the proceeding was listed for a practice day hearing on 8 July 2025 to consider the request for a review of the rejection of the application under s 71 of VCAT Act.
6. At the practice day hearing, the applicant provided a letter addressed to the Commissioner of State Revenue dated 29 May 2025 requesting the matter to be referred to the Tribunal under s 106(1)(b) of the Taxation Administration Act 1997 (Vic) (TA Act).[5]
7. The respondent was unable to provide submissions at the practice day hearing. This was unhelpful and surprising given the Tribunal's orders dated 14 May 2025 set out the purpose of the practice day hearing scheduled on 8 July 2025 was to consider 'the request for a review of the rejection of the application under s 71 of the VCAT Act by the principal registrar'.
8. Consequently, the Tribunal made the following orders on 8 July 2025:

1. The applicant filed the further documents required under order 1 on 9 July 2025.
2. The respondent filed written submissions on 22 July 2025.
3. The applicant filed written submissions in reply on 25 July 2025.[6]
4. It is noted that the applicant filed a further document on 1 August 2025 relating to nine other applications in the Review and Regulation List[7]. The final paragraph states:

'As the challenge to the Tribunal's review jurisdiction impacts the Tribunal's consideration of the jurisdictional issue in L0026/2025, I intend to file a copy of this letter in those proceedings'.

1. The applicant filed a final letter on 18 August 2025 requesting a further hearing and further orders.

1. The relevant sections of the VL Act are as follows:

(1) A person aggrieved by a valuation of any land made or caused to be made by the valuer-general may lodge a written objection to that valuation, on any one or more of the grounds set out in section 17, with the authority that served the notice of valuation.

(a) contain the prescribed information (if any); and

(b) give particulars of the bases of valuation to which objection is made; and

(c) state the grounds on which the objection is based.

(3) An objection must not be disallowed merely because of a failure to comply with subsection (2).

_(3A) In addition to the requirements of subsection (2), if - _

(a) a ground for the objection is that the value assigned is incorrect; and

_(b) the value assigned is not less than the prescribed amount - _

the objection must state the amount that the objector contends is the correct value.

(3B) An amount stated in an objection in accordance with subsection (3A) is not binding on the objector.

(4) A person who is served with a notice of valuation is deemed to be a person aggrieved by the valuation whether or not the valuation is used for the purposes of a rate or tax levied by the authority that served the notice, if the person is aggrieved by the valuation on any one or more of the grounds set out in section 17.

_(5) A person is deemed to be a person aggrieved by a valuation of land if - _

(a) the person is liable for or required to pay any rate or tax in respect of land; and

(b) the person has not been served with a notice of valuation; and

(c) the person is aggrieved by the valuation on any one or more of the grounds set out in section 17.

(6) Despite subsection (1), a person referred to in subsection (5) must lodge the objection with the rating authority that issued the assessment of the rate or tax.

(6A) A person who has been served with a notice of valuation and who is subsequently assessed for land tax , commercial and industrial property tax or windfall gains tax based on that valuation is deemed to be a person aggrieved by the valuation when the person receives the notice of assessment, if the person is aggrieved by the base or bases of valuation that were used to assess the relevant tax on any one or more of the grounds set out in section 17.

_(6AB) A person who is assessed for windfall gains tax is deemed, when the person receives the notice of assessment of that tax, to be a person aggrieved by - _

(a) The capital improved value of the land as assessed in the supplementary valuation made under Part IIB; and

_(b) any other capital improved value used to assess the tax that was in a valuation made under this Act - _

(c) if the person is aggrieved by the valuation on any one or more of the grounds set out in section 17.

(6AC) A person referred to in subsection (6AB) who lodges a written objection to a valuation referred to in that subsection is taken to have objected in relation to the capital improved value in each of the valuations referred to in that subsection even if the objection only addresses one of those valuations.

(6B) Despite subsection (1), a person referred to in subsection (6A) or (6AB) must lodge the objection with the Commissioner, who, if it is lodged within time, must forward the objection to the valuer-general.

(6C) For the purposes of any time period in this Part other than , an objection referred to in subsection (6B) is taken to have been lodged at the time at which the valuer-general receives the objection from the Commissioner.

(7) This section does not apply in respect of a valuation of a transmission easement made under section 5B.

(8) This section does not apply in respect of a valuation made by the Commissioner or made for the Commissioner by the valuer‑general or a valuer nominated by the valuer-general.

Section 96(1)(ca) of the Taxation Administration Act 1997 provides for objections to valuations made for the Commissioner by the valuer-general or a valuer nominated by the valuer-general.

(9) This section applies in respect of a general or supplementary valuation made under Part IIA.

17 Grounds for objection

_The grounds for an objection are - _

(a) that the value assigned is too high or too low;

(b) ...

_An objection must be lodged - _

(a) within 2 months after the notice of valuation is served; or

_(b) in the case of a person referred to in section 16(5) - _

(i) if a notice of assessment of the rate or tax was served on the person by a rating authority, within 2 months after the notice was served; or

(ii) if a notice of assessment of the rate or tax was not served on the person by a rating authority and the person is the occupier of the land, within 4 months after the date of issue specified on the notice; or

(c) in the case of a person referred to in section 16(6A) or (6AB) - within 2 months after receiving the notice of assessment of land tax, commercial and industrial property tax or windfall gains tax (as the case requires).

...

21 Determination of objection

(1) An objection must be determined in accordance with section 20 and this section.

(2) ...

(2A) A valuation authority with whom a valuation has been lodged or to whom an objection has been referred under subsection (2), must refer the objection to the valuer who made the valuation.

(2B) A valuer to whom an objection has been referred must provide the objector with a reasonable opportunity to discuss his or her objection with the valuer.

_(3) Within 4 months after receiving the objection, the valuer must - _

(a) if he or she considers that no adjustment in the valuation is justified - give the objector written notice of that decision; or

(b) ...

22 Application to VCAT for review

(1) An objector who is dissatisfied with the decision of a valuer or the valuer-general on the objection may apply to VCAT for review of the decision.

(2) If the valuer for a valuation authority has not given an objector notice of a decision on the objection or a copy of a recommendation under section 21(3)(b)(ii) within 4 months after the objection was lodged with the valuation authority, the valuer is deemed to have made a decision that no adjustment in the valuation is justified.

(3) If the valuer-general has not given an objector notice of a decision under section 21(5) within 2 months after a copy of a recommendation was given to the objector under section 21(3)(b)(ii), the valuer-general is deemed to have made a decision disallowing the recommended adjustment.

_(4) An application under this section must be made - _

(a) in the case of an application in respect

of a deemed decision referred to in subsection (2) - within 9 months after the date on which the objection was lodged with the valuation authority;

(b) in the case of an application in respect

of a deemed decision referred to in subsection (3) - at any time after the end of the 2 month period referred to in that subsection;

(c) in any other case - within 30 days after the date notice of the decision is given to the objector.

...

1. The relevant section of the TA Act is as follows:

96 Objection > > _(1) A taxpayer may lodge a written objection with the Commissioner if the taxpayer is dissatisfied with - _ > > (a) an assessment, other than a compromise assessment; or > > ... > > (ca) a valuation made for or on behalf of the Commissioner under section 21(1)(b) of the Land Tax Act 2005 by the Valuer-General or a valuer nominated by the Valuer-General that is used by the Commissioner in an assessment of land tax or commercial and industrial property tax; or > > (cb) a valuation made for or on behalf of the Commissioner under section 13 of the Windfall Gains Tax Act 2021 by the Valuer-General or a valuer nominated by the Valuer-General that is used by the Commissioner in an assessment of windfall gains tax; or > > (d) a decision of the Commissioner under the Payroll Tax Act 2007. > > (1A) A reference in subsection (1)(d) to a decision does not include a refusal by the Commissioner to refund tax paid or purportedly paid by the taxpayer. > > (1B) For the avoidance of doubt, it is declared that an amount by which tax is overpaid is taken to be tax for the purposes of subsection (1A). > > (2) No court or administrative review body, including the Tribunal, has jurisdiction or power to consider any question concerning an assessment or decision referred to in subsection (1), except as provided by this Part. > > (3) A taxpayer who is dissatisfied with a valuation referred to in subsection (1)(cb) and lodges a written objection in relation to that valuation must object to both valuations used by the Commissioner in the assessment of windfall gains tax, regardless of whether the grounds for the objection relate to only one of those valuations. > > 97 Grounds for objection > > (1) The grounds for the objection must be stated fully and in detail, and must be in writing. > > (2) The grounds for the objection, in the case of a reassessment, may only relate to tax liabilities specified in the reassessment to the extent that they are additional to, or greater than, those under the previous assessment. > > (2A) A taxpayer cannot object to an assessment or decision referred to in section 96(1) on any ground relating to Part 9A. > > _(3) A taxpayer cannot object to an assessment of land tax or commercial and industrial property tax on any ground relating to the value of the land if - _

(a) The assessment is based on a valuation made by a valuation authority under the Valuation of Land Act 1960; and

(b) that valuation was not made for or on behalf of the Commissioner under section 21(1)(b) of the Land Tax Act 2005.

_(3A) A taxpayer cannot object to an assessment of windfall gains tax on any ground relating to the value of the land on which the tax is assessed if - _

(a) The assessment is based on a valuation made by a valuation authority under the Valuation of Land Act 1960; and

(b) that valuation was not made for or on behalf of the Commissioner under section 13 of the Windfall Gains Tax Act 2021.

(4) Nothing in subsection (3) or (3A) limits or affects the right of any person to object to a valuation in accordance with Part III of the Valuation of Land Act 1960.

_(5) A taxpayer cannot object to an assessment of a contribution imposed in relation to a GAIC event in respect of land under Part 9B of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 on any ground other than the following grounds - _

(a) that the folio of the Register relating to that land was incorrectly recorded with a notification under section 201UD of that Act indicating that the land may be land in respect of which a contribution may be payable;

_(b) that the contribution should not have been imposed as - _

1. the event was an excluded event within the meaning of section 201RB of that Act; or
2. the land was not subject to a contribution under section 201SA of that Act;

(c) that the area of the land or the amount of the contribution has been calculated incorrectly;

(d) in the case of a contribution imposed in respect of a dutiable transaction relating to land, that an exemption under Subdivision 2 of Division 3 of that Part applies to that transaction.

99 Time for lodging objection

(1) An objection must be lodged with the Commissioner within 60 days after the date of service of the notice of the assessment or decision on the taxpayer, except as provided by section 100.

(2) An objection is taken to have been lodged with the Commissioner when it is received by the Commissioner.

106 Right of review or appeal

_(1) If - _

(a) a taxpayer is dissatisfied with the Commissioner's determination of the taxpayer's objection; or

_(b) 90 days (not including any period of suspension under section 102) have passed since a taxpayer's objection was received by the Commissioner and the Commissioner has not determined the objection - _

the taxpayer, in writing, may request the Commissioner to refer the matter to the Tribunal or to treat the objection as an appeal and cause it to be set down for hearing at the next sittings of the Supreme Court.

_(2) The taxpayer's request - _

(a) in the circumstances referred to in subsection (1)(a), must be made within 60 days after the date of service on the taxpayer of the notice of the Commissioner's determination of the objection; or

(b) in the circumstances referred to in subsection (1)(b), may be made at any time after the 90 day period (not including any period of suspension under section 102).

(3) Subject to section 107, within 60 days after the request, the Commissioner must refer the matter for review or cause the objection to be set down for hearing accordingly.

107 Request for further and better particulars

(1) Within 30 days after receiving a request to refer a matter or treat an objection as an appeal, the Commissioner may require the taxpayer to give further and better particulars of the objection.

_(2) If, within 30 days after giving the notice - _

(a) particulars are given, the Commissioner is not bound to refer the matter or cause the objection to be set down for hearing until 30 days after the Commissioner has received full details of the objection; or

(b) particulars are not given, the Commissioner must not refer the matter or cause the objection to be set down for hearing.

(1) The Tribunal must review a matter referred to it and, subject to subsection (2), may confirm, reduce, increase or vary the assessment or decision.

(2) If the taxpayer does not appear before the Tribunal, the Tribunal must confirm the assessment or decision. However, if good cause is shown, the Tribunal, within the time prescribed by the regulations, may re-open and review the matter.

(3) If the matter under review relates to a valuation made for or on behalf of the Commissioner under section 21(1)(b) of the Land Tax Act 2005 used by the Commissioner in an assessment of land tax or commercial and industrial property tax, the Tribunal has the same powers with respect to that matter as it has in a review under Part III of the Valuation of Land Act 1960 and the provisions of that Part, with any necessary modifications, apply accordingly.

(4) The powers of the Tribunal under subsection (3) are in addition to its powers and functions under this Act and the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998.

1. The applicant relied upon his letter to the Commissioner of State Revenue dated 29 May 2025 (SRO 29 May 2025). The letter of 29 May 2025 sent after the application was filed with the Tribunal, requested the Commissioner to refer the matter to the Tribunal for review under s 106(1)(b) of the TA Act. The applicant's contentions in SRO 29 May 2025 follow.
2. On 4 November 2024, the applicant lodged objections to five Land Tax Reassessment Notices and four Vacant Residential Land Tax Assessments all issued on 6 September 2024 and within the 60 day requirement under s 99 of the TA Act.
3. The applicant received the notices issued on 6 September 2024 by mail on 12 September 2024.
4. The applicant listed nine grounds for objection with legal argument and a further five errors of a jurisdictional character. A principal ground for objection was that the delegate made no determinations under ss 34B and 34C of the Land Tax Act 2005 (Vic) (LT Act) for the imposition of Vacant Residential Land Tax (VRLT) and Land Tax to be authorised under s 34A of the LT Act. A further ground for objection was that the delegate misinterpreted and/or misapplied s 34C(2) of the LT Act.
5. Section 96(1) of the TA Act provides the taxpayer with a binary choice: a taxpayer may object to an assessment, or to a valuation used in the assessment of land tax.
6. Section 96(1)(ca) was inserted into the TA Act by s 111(1) of the LT Act which came into operation on 1 January 2006. Clause 111 of the Explanatory Memorandum to the Land Tax Bill 2005 states:

Clause 111 Sub-clause (1) inserts a new section 96(1)(ca) in the Taxation Administration Act 1997 to enable objections to valuations made by the Valuer-General that are used by the Commissioner for land tax assessment purposes. > > Sub-clause (2) inserts new sub-sections into section 97 of the Taxation Administration Act 1997, so that-- > > a taxpayer cannot object to an assessment of land tax on any ground relating to the value of the land if the assessment is based on a valuation made by a rating authority under the Valuation of Land Act 1960; > > the right of any person to object to a valuation in accordance with Part ill of the Valuation of Land Act 1960 is not affected; > > a taxpayer cannot object to an indexation factor prescribed for the purposes of section 20 of the Land Tax Act 2005. (Emphasis added).[8]

7. On 6 September 2024, the Commissioner issued Notices of Valuations in respect of the land owned by the applicant. Objections to the valuations were lodged with the Commissioner on 4 November 2024 in compliance with s 18(a) of the VL Act.
8. To avoid duplication in legal argument and repetition of the same facts, the Objections to the valuations were consolidated with the Objections to the assessments of VRLT and Land Tax.
9. The grounds for objection in s 17 of the VL Act are the high valuations in the Land Tax Reassessment Notices and the Vacant Residential Land Tax Assessment Notices.
10. The Objections to the valuations relied on the transitional arrangements and new provisions inserted into the LT Act by the State Taxation Acts Further Amendment Act 2019 (Vic) which required the delegate to establish whether there was a residence that was uninhabitable on the land for the purposes of VRLT.
11. The delegate failed to make a determination under s 34B of the LT Act as he was required to do and the unadjusted valuations by the Valuer-General were used in the assessment of VRLT and Land Tax. In consequence thereof, the applicant considered that, failing a determination under s 348, the valuations by the Valuer-General were invalid, and the assessment of VRLT and Land Tax wrong in law.
12. As no determination(s) was made by the Commissioner after 90 days following receipt of the written Objections to the assessments, the applicant may request the Commissioner to refer the matter to the Tribunal for review at any time after the 90-day period.
13. All instalment payments in respect to the assessment of VRLT were made by the applicant, and the final instalment payment of Land Tax was made on 29 May 2025. On receipt of the request for referral the Commissioner may require the taxpayer to provide further and better particulars of the Objections, and within 60 days after the request the Commissioner must refer the matter for review by the Tribunal or cause the objection to be set down for hearing at the next sittings of the Supreme Court.
14. The 90-day period for determination of the Objections expired on 8 February 2025 and the final instalment of Land Tax was paid on 29 May 2025.
15. Accordingly, the Commissioner must either refer the matter to the Tribunal or cause it to be set down for hearing before the Court by Tuesday, 29 July 2025.
16. It is the applicant's view, 'that if there is an unamendable defect in the application lodged with the Tribunal in the exercise of rights under s 16(1) of the VL Act, it is for the Valuer-General, as the Respondent, to apply for dismissal of the application, and a decision to reject the application ex facie should not be taken lightly or arbitrarily.'
17. In conclusion the applicant submits that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear L0026/2025 as a test case of the valuations issued on 6 September 2024 under:

a) s 22(2) of the VL Act in consequence of the decision by the Valuer-General that no adjustment to the valuation(s) is justified, and > > b) s 111(1) of the Act upon referral of the matter to the Tribunal in accordance with s 106(3). Whilst the review by the Tribunal is limited to a review of the grounds of the Objections to the assessments - and not a review of a valuation used in the assessment of Land Tax, the Tribunal must determine whether the delegate made determinations under ss 348 and 34C of the LT Act for the imposition of VRLT and Land Tax to be authorised by s 34A.

18. On 25 July 2025, the applicant lodged submissions in reply to the submissions of the respondent.
19. The applicant recites the purpose of the practice day hearing to review the decision of the Principal Registrar's to reject the application.
20. On 1 August 2025, the applicant wrote a letter to the Principal Registrar. The letter referred to:

VCAT Reference Z835/2025, Z836/2025 Z837/2025 Z838/2025 Z839/2025 Z840/2025 Z841/2025 Z842/2025 and Z843/2025 Michael Priestly v Commissioner of State Revenue.

1. At the end of the letter, the applicant advised that he would also file a copy of the letter on L0026/2025, (this proceeding) as the challenge to the Tribunal's review jurisdiction also impacts this matter.
2. On page 4 of the applicant's letter he states:

As a consequence of the recorded proceedings on 8 July 2025, the Commissioner part referred the Objections to Valuations to the Valuer-General on 21 July 2025, having failed to do so when the Objections were purportedly received by the SRO office in Ballarat on 6 November 2024. In the full knowledge that the Objections were part referred to the Valuer-General on 21 July 2025, the Commissioner referred the Objections to Assessments to the Tribunal for review. > > The Tribunal cannot proceed to review the nine grounds for the Objections to Assessments and a further five errors of a jurisdictional character referred to in the Objections 11 as the valuations used by the delegate of the Commissioner in the reassessment of Land Tax and assessment of VRLT for the subject properties were part referred to the Valuer-General on 21 July 2025. > > The referral of the matters to the Tribunal by the Commissioner under s. 106(3) of the Taxation Administration Act 1997 is fatally defective, and the Tribunal cannot proceed with its review of the stated grounds for the Objections to Assessments12 as there is no right of review.

3. On 18 August 2025, the applicant filed a further letter requesting a hearing and orders to be made for discovery of documents by Valuer-General Victoria (VGV) and the Commissioner of State Revenue.

1. The respondent's submission relies on the following facts:

a) On 6 November 2024, an objection signed by the Applicant and dated 4 November 2024 was received at the SRO. The objection took the form of a 31-page submission. The document was stamped "received" by the SRO office in Ballarat and date-stamped 6 November 2024 (November submission).[9] > > b) The November submission objected to land tax for five assessment numbers in respect of properties at three addresses. The addresses listed include the Subject Land, in addition to two units in Cuming Street, Yarraville.[10] > > c) The November submission also objected to vacant residential land tax for five assessment numbers relevant to the same three addresses.[11] > > d) The November submission raises a range of grounds including that the notices of assessment for the periods concerned are invalid for reasons that relate to procedural fairness and natural justice in addition to jurisdictional error. The November submission raises allegations concerning an investigation conducted by the SRO into whether properties owned by the Applicant were vacant. Numerous photographs are attached to the submission.[12] > > e) In or about 6 November 2024, SRO did not refer the November submission to the VGV.[13] > > f) On 27 March 2025, an application for review was filed in the Tribunal by the applicant purporting to seek review under s 22 of the VLA.[14] > > g) On 21 July 2025, the SRO Valuations Team advised VGV that it had lodged the Applicant's objections to land tax for the Subject Land for the years 2020 to 2024 with the VGV.[15]

2. The submissions of VGV outline the legislative framework for objections in the VL Act.
3. VGV submits that the application for review should be struck out on the basis that it is misconceived. There is no reviewable decision for the purposes of s 22 of the VL Act.
4. The conclusion is based on the following reasons[16]:

It appears clear for present purposes that the Applicant is a person aggrieved. > > It is also clear that the Applicant sent an objection to the SRO, date stamped "received" on 6 November 2024 by SRO Ballarat office. > > The VLA provides for the scenario where an objection to land tax has been lodged with an authority that is not the valuation authority that caused the valuation to be made. > > By s 16C, for the purposes of any time period in this Part other than s 18, an objection referred to in sub-s (6B) is taken to have been lodged at the time at which the valuation authority receives the objection from the SRO. > > The objection was received by the SRO on 6 November 2024. However, it was not referred to the valuation authority until 21 July 2025. > > When the objection is lodged with an authority that is not the valuation authority, the first step in determination of the objection is for the objection to be referred to the valuation authority in accordance with s 21(2): > > (2) If an objection has been lodged with an authority that is not the valuation authority that caused the valuation to be made, the authority must refer the objection to that valuation authority. > > In this case, the VLA places an obligation on the SRO to refer the objection to VGV as a separate step. The requirement for SRO to refer an objection is found in s 21(2). In the present case, that obligation was complied with only recently, on 21 July 2025. > > Having now been referred the objection, it is a matter for VGV to determine it in accordance with ss 20 and 21 (s 21(2)). > > The VLA mandates the process for an objection to be determined. Section 21(1) uses the word "must": > > (1) An objection must be determined in accordance with section 20 and this section. [Emphasis added] > > The objection must be referred to the valuer who made the valuation. The VGV must determine the objection in accordance with s 21(4). > > It is only after referral and lodgement of the objection with the VGV, and determination of the objection in accordance with ss 20 and 21 of the VLA, that an application to the Tribunal under s 22 may be made. > > Mr Priestley is respectfully mistaken in his submission that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the proceeding "as a test case of the valuations issued on 6 September 2024" under s 22(2) of the VLA "in consequence of the decision by the Valuer-General that no adjustment to the valuation(s) is justified". > > No decision has, yet, been made on the objection. The ss 20 and 21 process must be followed. > > At the present time, and for the purposes of this proceeding, there is no reviewable decision before the Tribunal. > > Having now been referred the objection in accordance with s 21(2), on 21 July 2025, the VGV must refer the objection to a valuer and follow the process set out in ss 20 and 21. > > There is no ancillary power for the Tribunal (or the VGV) to hear (or participate in) a proceeding beyond the bounds of s 22. The Tribunal (and the VGV) are limited by the terms of the statute.

5. VGV submit that the orders available to the Tribunal are:

a) by s 75(1) of the VCAT Act, the Tribunal may make an order summarily dismissing or striking out the proceeding on the basis that the proceeding is misconceived. > > b) by s 74(1) of the VCAT Act, the Tribunal may give leave for the Applicant to withdraw the application before it is determined by the Tribunal.

6. Further, at the Tribunal's discretion, the proceeding could be left open pending a reviewable decision being made. The application could be amended at a later date should the applicant seek review of a new decision.
7. In the submissions of the VGV, without a reviewable decision before it, the Tribunal does not presently have jurisdiction to hear or determine the application for review.[17]

SRO issued a 2024 Land Tax Assessment Notice for Unit 1 and Unit 2, 8A Cuming Steet, Yarraville.

SRO advised applicant of outcome of Land Tax Investigation.

Land Tax Reassessment Notices were issued for 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024 for 269 North Road, Caulfield South and Units 1 and 2, 8A Cuming Street, Yarraville.

Vacant Residential Land Tax Assessment Notices were issued for 2020 and 2022 (269 North Road, Caulfield South);

2022 (269 North Road, Caulfield South and Unit 1, 8A Cuming Street, Yarraville);

2024 (269 North Road, Caulfield South and Units 1 and 2, 8A Cuming Street, Yarraville).

Applicant objected to all Land Tax Reassessment Notices for the years 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024; and

Vacant Residential Land Tax Assessment Notices for the years 2020, 2022, 2023 and 2024.

*The objections were dated stamped as received by the State Revenue Office Ballarat 6 November 2024.

Applicant lodged an application with VCAT for the review of the CIV at the relevant valuation date of 1 January 2019 for 269 North Road, Caulfield South.

Acting Deputy Registrar rejected the application[18].

The applicant requested the application be reinstated.

Orders issued listing matter for a practice day hearing on 8 July 2025 to consider the rejection of the application.

Letter to Commissioner of State Revenue requesting referral of objections to Tribunal.

Applicant filed documents in response to order 1 of the Tribunal's orders dated 8 July 2025.

Respondent filed submissions in response to order 1 of the Tribunal's orders dated 8 July 2025.

Commissioner referred objection to Tribunal in relation to Review and Regulation List applications.

Applicant's letter relating to nine Review and Regulation List applications and L0026/2025.

Applicant letter requesting a further hearing and further orders.

1. Section 99 of the TA Act requires any objection to be lodged with the Commissioner within 60 days after the date of service of the notice of assessment. Land Tax Assessments were issued on 6 September 2024, the applicant lodged objections within the 60-day time period on 6 November 2024.[19]
2. The applicant requested a further hearing and the following orders:
   • that the Valuer-General sends to the Tribunal within 28 days of receipt of this notice all documents relating to the referral of the Objections to valuations by the Commissioner of State Revenue on 21 July 2015 including documents and communications which are subject tb legal professional privilege,
   • that the Commissioner of State Revenue sends to the Tribunal within 28 days of receipt of this no ice all documents relating to the referral of the Objections to valuations to the Valuer-General on 21 July 2025 including:
     1. documents and communications which are subject to legal professional privilege, and
     2. the true hard copy of the consolidated Objection lodged with the Commissioner of State Revenue on 4 November 2024. (footnotes omitted)
3. The decision before the Tribunal is a discrete decision that the applicant has aptly recited. It is a review of the principal registrar's rejection of the application. The Tribunal is not reviewing the merits of the application. The applicant states the Tribunal has 'confused a notice of re-assessment of Land Tax and assessment of VRLT with a Notice of Valuation of land'.
4. The valuer and/or the VGV only have the ability to determine objections on the grounds given by the VL Act. Similarly, the Tribunal can only review decisions that we have jurisdiction to review.
5. The applicant has repeatedly requested that Z300/2025 in the Review and Regulation List is combined with L0026/2024 in the Planning and Environment List. The matters are separate applications as the Tribunal's jurisdiction in the Review and Regulation List and Planning and Environment List is conferred by separate acts of parliament. However, if the Tribunal has jurisdiction, it may consider the matters at the same time.
6. As the applicant states, the first duty of any court is to be satisfied of its own jurisdiction.[20]
7. Section 106 of the TA Act provides a right of review or appeal. Section 106(1)(b) states that:

_(1) If - _ > > (a) a taxpayer is dissatisfied with the Commissioner's determination of the taxpayer's objection; or > > _(b) 90 days (not including any period of suspension under section 102) have passed since a taxpayer's objection was received by the Commissioner and the Commissioner has not determined the objection - _ > > the taxpayer, in writing, may request the Commissioner to refer the matter to the Tribunal or to treat the objection as an appeal and cause it to be set down for hearing at the next sittings of the Supreme Court. > > _(2) The taxpayer's request - _ > > (a) in the circumstances referred to in subsection (1)(a), must be made within 60 days after the date of service on the taxpayer of the notice of the Commissioner's determination of the objection; or > > (b) in the circumstances referred to in subsection (1)(b), may be made at any time after the 90-day period (not including any period of suspension under section 102). > > (3) Subject to section 107, within 60 days after the request, the Commissioner must refer the matter for review or cause the objection to be set down for hearing accordingly.

8. On the 29 May 2025, the applicant requested the Commissioner to refer the matter to the Tribunal as the Commissioner had not determined the objection with the 90-day period.
9. On 27 March 2025 the applicant applied to the Tribunal under s 22 of the VL Act for review of a valuation.
10. The referral from the Commissioner to the Review and Regulation List is a separate application and not part of this proceeding.
11. The applicant advised the Tribunal at the practice day hearing on 8 July 2025, that the contended value of zero was not because he believed the CIV of the subject property was zero; but because the applicant contended that the taxable value of the subject property was zero on the basis that it should be exempt.
12. Although the applicant on 29 May 20025 (post the 90-day period) requested the Commissioner refer the matter to the Tribunal under s 106(2)(b) of the TA Act; this was not done until the 28 July 2025. However, this relates to the proceeding/s in the Review and Regulation List under the TA Act, not the current proceeding L0026/2024 under the VL Act.
13. We accept that the date the objection was lodged with the Commissioner was 6 November 2024 and within the 60-day time period for an objection. However, there is no jurisdiction under the VL Act to consider the taxable value or review the exemption sought by the applicant at any of the relevant dates.
14. The applicant stated that he did not seek a review of the valuation but a review of the exemption. There is no ground of objection in the VL Act that includes an exemption.
15. Therefore, the decision of the principal registrar to reject the application is confirmed.

Teresa Bisucci, Deputy President Justine Jacono, Senior Member

[1] The submissions of the parties have all been considered in the determination of the proceeding. In accordance with the practice of the Tribunal, not all of this material will be cited or referred to in these reasons.

[2] The 2024 Land Tax Assessment Notice was given to the Tribunal by the applicant during the practice day hearing and then filed on 9 July 2025.

[3] The ground of objection in s 17a) of the VL Act changed from 'too high or too low' to 'incorrect'. The transitional provisions in s 39 of the VL Act state that the new ground applies to objections lodged on or after 1 January 2025. As this application involves an objection lodged prior to 1 January 2025, the ground of objection in s 17a) is that the values assigned is too high or too low.

[4] Letter is dated 12 March 2025, filed on 12 May 2025.

[5] The letter was filed with the Tribunal on 9 July 2025 in accordance with the Tribunal's orders dated 8 July 2025.

[6] No order was made for written submissions in reply. The applicant makes the submissions extempore and relies on the principles of natural justice.

[7] VCAT Reference Z835/2025, Z836/2025 Z837/2025 Z838/2025 Z839/2025 Z840/2025 Z841/2025 Z842/2025 and Z843/2025.

[9] Valuation Authority's Outline of Submission dated 22 July 2025 (Respondent submissions) [6].