ART Appeal
Date of Application:

Findings:

1. 20-5(3)(a) Company has ceased to meet registration requirement that each director is a fit and proper person
2. 20-5(3)(d) Company has ceased to meet registration requirement that it has a sufficient number of registered tax practitioner individuals to provide tax agent services to a competent standard and to provide supervisory arrangements

Explanation:

KPG Taxation – Brisbane Pty Ltd

Ceased to meet the registration requirements
• 20-5(3)(a) The company must satisfy the Board that each director of the company must be a fit and proper person
• 20-5(3)(d)(i) The company must have sufficient number of individuals, being registered tax practitioners, to provide services to a competent standard and to carry out supervisory arrangements

On 4 December 2025, after completing an investigation, the Tax Practitioners Board (TPB) decided to terminate the tax agent registration of KPG Taxation Brisbane Pty Ltd (the Company) on the basis that the Company ceased to meet the following tax practitioner registration requirements:
1. paragraph 20-5(3)(a) of the TASA that each of its directors be a fit and proper person, as the Board determined its sole director, Mr Parampreet Singh Rajput (Mr Rajput) was no longer a fit and proper person; and
2. subparagraph 20-5(3)(d)(i) of the TASA that it must have a sufficient number of individuals, being registered tax practitioners, to provide services to a competent standard and to carry out supervisory arrangements, on the basis that the Board found the Company’s sole supervising agent, Mr Rajput, is not considered sufficient to provide tax agent services to a competent standard and to carry out supervisory arrangements.
The TPB determined that Mr Rajput was no longer a fit and proper person on the basis that he:
1. engaged in conduct which breached subsections 30-10(1) and 30-10(2) of the Code in the Tax Agent Services Act 2009 (TASA);
2. he was found to have been involved within the meaning of subsection 550(2) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (FW Act), in his company’s (P&G Accounting Solution Pty Ltd) contraventions of section 45, section 125, subsection 323(1), subsection 325(1), paragraph 325(1)(b) and subsection 344(e) of the FW Act in in Kaur v P & G Accounting Solution Pty Ltd [2025] FedCFamC2G 30 (Kaur Judgment);
3. Judge Forbes stated in the Kaur Judgment that Mr Rajput was found to be less than truthful, involved in the kickback arrangement by accepting payments from Ms Kaur and agreeing to the extension of time of leave to avoid disclosure of the allegation;
4. he failed to notify the Board in writing within 30 days as per paragraphs 30-35(1)(c) and 30-35(4) of the TASA when an event relevant to his registration occurred. He did not notify the Board until 29 April 2025 in his renewal application, approximately three months after the Kaur Judgment had been handed down;
5. he deliberately made false statements to the Commissioner of Taxation by lodging incorrect returns and statements;
6. he engaged in conduct, including “kickback payment” arrangements which were televised by the “A Current Affair” program, which undermined public trust and discredited the integrity of the tax profession.
In addition, the TPB determined that the Company’s sole supervising agent, Mr Rajput was not considered sufficient to provide tax agent services to a competent standard and to carry out supervisory arrangements.

The TPB considered its role as regulator of the tax practitioner profession and focused on protecting the public and the integrity of the tax practitioner profession, consistent with the object of the TASA. Accordingly, the TPB decided to terminate the Company’s registration as a tax agent as it had ceased to meet the registration requirement paragraph 20-5(3)(a) of the TASA that each director must be a fit and proper person, and subparagraph 20-5(3)(d)(i) of the TASA that it must have a sufficient number of registered individual tax agents to provide tax agent services to a competent standard and to carry out supervisory arrangements.

On 15 January 2026, the Company applied to the Administrative Review Tribunal (ART) for a stay and review of the TPB’s decision of 4 December 2025 to terminate its tax agent registration.
On 26 March 2026, the ART refused the Company’s application for a stay of the TPB’s decision.
The review of the TPB’s decision is yet to be heard.