Private ruling: Commissioner's discretion
Date of advice: 22 April 2026
Published: 13 July 2026
Date scheme commenced: 1 July 20xx

Ruling: Q1: Will the Commissioner exercise the discretion under section 118-195 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 (ITAA 1997) to allow an extension of time for you to dispose of your ownership interest in the dwelling and disregard the capital gain or capital loss you made on the disposal? Answer: 1 Yes. Having considered your circumstances and the relevant factors the Commissioner will allow an extension of time. Further information about the Commissioner's discretion can be found by searching ato.gov.au for ' QC 66057 ' . This private ruling applies for the following period Year ending 30 June 20xx The scheme commenced on: 1 July 20xx


Relevant legislative provisions: Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 section 118-195


Relevant facts: The deceased passed away. | The deceased's spouse had pre-deceased, and they were survived by child A and Child B. | Probate was granted on XX XX 20XX to Child B as the named executor in the Will. | Child B is a resident for Australian taxation purposes. | Under the will and because the deceased's spouse predeceased them, the estate is to be divided between the deceased's children in equal shares. | At date of death, the deceased owned a property. (the property). | The deceased acquired the property with their late spouse and was registered on the title on xx xx 19xx. | The deceased was registered as the sole owner on xx xx 20xx under the rule of survivorship. | The property was the deceased's main residence at date of death and was not being used for income producing purposes. | The property is less than 2 hectares in size. | After date of death, the property was left vacant and was not income producing. | Child A and Child B, as the only remaining beneficiaries, entered discussions to allow Child B to purchase the entire property, pursuant to which Child B believed a binding agreement had been reached. | Child A subsequently maintained a binding agreement did not exist and engaged in further discussions to attempt to resolve the dispute between them. Negotiations broke down with Child B maintaining a binding agreement had been reached and Child A maintaining it had not. | After significant dispute, Child A sought legal advice in XX 20XX, and in XX 20XX a final proposal was put forward to Child B through their representative in order to resolve the dispute that included preparing a draft Deed of Family Arrangement and draft loan agreement, but negotiations again broke down in xx 20xx. | On xx xx 20xx, Child A commenced legal proceedings seeking to remove Child B as Executor and for the property to be sold. | Child B defended the proceedings on various grounds including the basis that they believed a binding agreement for them to acquire the property had been reached with Child A. | On XX XX 20XX, the parties proceeded to Court ordered mediation on the issues. On XX XX 20XX, a Deed of Settlement was reached under which Child B agreed to list the property for sale by XX XX 20XX. | The property was promptly listed for sale and subsequently sold at public auction on XX XX 20XX. | Settlement occurred on XX XX 20XX.