TAWAU: Allegations over an alleged discrepancy involving 41 gold dores took centre stage in the High Court here on Tuesday as the defence questioned the basis and reliability of the claim during ongoing trial proceedings involving Bahvest Resources Berhad and its subsidiary Wullersdorf Resources Sdn Bhd.
The matter was heard before Judicial Commissioner Steve Ritikos, with the plaintiffs’ key witness, Chong Tzu Khen, subjected to detailed cross-examination by defence counsel Henry Lim on how the conclusion relating to the alleged discrepancy was reached.
Chong told the court that the initial finding of a shortfall of 41 gold dores was derived from a comparison between production records and sales invoices.
He said the conclusion was first generated using the company’s SQL accounting system prior to any comprehensive internal investigation.
“A more detailed review was only carried out in 2024 with the involvement of additional personnel,” he said.
Under cross-examination, Chong agreed that the conclusion was based in part on internal analysis and assumptions, with not all production records independently verified.
He also agreed that certain production reports were regarded by him as “dubious” without external confirmation, although he maintained that sales invoices were more reliable and formed the basis of his assessment.
The court further heard that both production and sales processes would be relevant in assessing any discrepancy.
Chong confirmed that while production involved mining and processing activities, sales documentation, including invoices, was handled by the finance function.
He said Chong Khing Chung, who served as chief financial officer of Wullersdorf Resources, was responsible for sales documentation but did not oversee mining operations.
A key point raised by the defence was the absence of direct evidence linking any individual to the alleged discrepancy.
Chong agreed that there was no direct proof of payments received by Chong Khing Chung or any other party, nor evidence of personal benefit.
He further agreed that the conclusion was based on discrepancies in records rather than direct tracing.
The court was also told that documents were seized by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) on May 16, 2023, and only partially returned in 2025.
Despite investigations, no criminal charges have been brought to date and no convictions have been recorded.
A police report lodged in 2024 was initially classified as “No Further Action” (NFA) before being reopened in 2025.
The defence, Henry, further questioned the reliability of the data underpinning the claim, highlighting inconsistencies between production and sales records, the lack of independent verification, and reliance on selected documents.
Chong, however, maintained that sales records provided a more accurate reflection of actual transactions.
The cross-examination also touched on a related issue involving a Letter of Consent (LOC), where Chong agreed that a valuer’s report did not identify it as a condition precedent.
During the proceedings, the defence suggested that the alleged discrepancy was based on assumptions, incomplete datasets and interpretative analysis rather than conclusive forensic evidence.
The trial continues today.
