Search Results for: Capital Allowances Act 1990 18

Click the case name for better results:

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts

Girobank Plc v Clarke (HM Inspector of Taxes): CA 19 Dec 1997

The use of a building for data processing does not qualify it as the subjection of goods or materials to any process and therefore no capital allowance was claimable. Citations: Times 06-Jan-1998, Gazette 11-Feb-1998, [1997] EWCA Civ 3061 Statutes: Capital Allowances Act 1990 18 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appeal from – Girobank Plc v … Continue reading Girobank Plc v Clarke (HM Inspector of Taxes): CA 19 Dec 1997

Girobank Plc v Clarke (Inspector of Taxes): ChD 21 Mar 1996

The part use of an industrial building as an office defeats a capital allowance claim. Citations: Gazette 01-May-1996, Times 21-Mar-1996 Statutes: Capital Allowances Act 1990 18 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appealed to – Girobank Plc v Clarke (HM Inspector of Taxes) CA 19-Dec-1997 The use of a building for data processing does not qualify … Continue reading Girobank Plc v Clarke (Inspector of Taxes): ChD 21 Mar 1996

Bestway (Holdings) Ltd v Luff (Inspector of Taxes): ChD 4 Mar 1998

The taxpayer company operated a wholesale cash and carry business from a number of self-service supermarkets. The stores sold groceries, household goods, tobacco, confectionery and various kinds of alcohol. Although the buildings were not open to the public the customers who were mainly retail traders and caterers had access to most parts of the store … Continue reading Bestway (Holdings) Ltd v Luff (Inspector of Taxes): ChD 4 Mar 1998

Churchhouse, Regina (on the Application of) v Inland Revenue: Admn 4 Apr 2003

The taxpayer was a revenue informer one whose trade is described by Coke as ‘viperous vermin [who] under the reverend mantle of law and justice instituted for protection of the innocent, and the good of the Commonwealth, did vexe and depauperize the Subject, and commonly the poorer sort, for malice or private ends, and never … Continue reading Churchhouse, Regina (on the Application of) v Inland Revenue: Admn 4 Apr 2003

Gray (Inspector of Taxes) v Seymours Garden Centre: Chd 10 May 1993

A glasshouse ‘planteria’ which was used to show plants in a garden centre, was premises and not plant for capital allowances purposes. Citations: Ind Summary 18-Oct-1993, Ind Summary 10-May-1993 Statutes: Capital Allowances Act 1990 22 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appealed to – Gray (Inspector of Taxes) v Seymours Garden Centre (Horticulture) CA 31-May-1995 A … Continue reading Gray (Inspector of Taxes) v Seymours Garden Centre: Chd 10 May 1993

Revenue and Customs v Maco Door and Window Hardware (Uk) Ltd: ChD 19 Jul 2006

The Revenue sought to disallow for industrial buildings allowance sums expended on warehouse premises which were to be used to store window products imported for use in other manufacturing processes. Held: The Revenue’s appeal succeeded. ‘The question under s.18(1) is whether the warehouse is in use for the purposes of a trade which consists in … Continue reading Revenue and Customs v Maco Door and Window Hardware (Uk) Ltd: ChD 19 Jul 2006

Smith v Smith and Another: CA 19 Oct 2004

The father challenged a ruling that in calculating his liability to pay child support he was not entitled first to deduct, as a self-employed person, all the allowances he might claim against income tax by way of capital allowances. Held: The legislation is sloppy, muddled and would lead to unjust and absurd results. Nevertheless the … Continue reading Smith v Smith and Another: CA 19 Oct 2004

BMBF (No 24) Limited v the Commissioners of Inland Revenue: CA 6 Nov 2003

The taxpayer, a non-resident, operated a sale and lease back scheme of machinery to be used in its business within the UK. There had been a chain of leases. Held: The court had first to identify the ‘relevant lease’. It was the head lease which was the lease of the machinery on which the expemse … Continue reading BMBF (No 24) Limited v the Commissioners of Inland Revenue: CA 6 Nov 2003

Bradley (Inspector of Taxes) v London Electricity Plc: ChD 1 Aug 1996

A distinction is to be found between the construction of plant and the equipment installed. The Court should examine the function of a structure to decide if it was a plant or a building for allowance. Citations: Gazette 09-Oct-1996, Times 01-Aug-1996 Statutes: Capital Allowances Act 1990 24 Corporation Tax Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78546

Moore Stephens (A Firm) v Stone Rolls Ltd (in liquidation): HL 30 Jul 2009

The appellants had audited the books of the respondent company, but had failed to identify substantial frauds by an employee of the respondent. The auditors appealed a finding of professional negligence, relying on the maxim ex turpi causa non oritur actio. Held: (Mance and Scott LL dissenting) The appeal succeeded. The company could not bring … Continue reading Moore Stephens (A Firm) v Stone Rolls Ltd (in liquidation): HL 30 Jul 2009

Shove (Inspector of Taxes) v Lingfield Park 1991 Ltd: ChD 21 Jul 2003

The taxpayer, a race track owner, sought to claim the cost of laying an artificial all-weather race track surface as a capital allowance. The commissioners had found that it retained a separate identity from the grass, requiring maintenance and so forth, and that therefore it was plant, not premises. The revenue appealed. Held: The commissioners … Continue reading Shove (Inspector of Taxes) v Lingfield Park 1991 Ltd: ChD 21 Jul 2003

Kehoe, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: HL 14 Jul 2005

The applicant contended that the 1991 Act infringed her human rights in denying her access to court to obtain maintenance for her children. Held: The applicant had no substantive right to take part in the enforcement process in domestic law which is capable in Convention law of engaging the guarantees in it. ‘Sympathetic though one … Continue reading Kehoe, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: HL 14 Jul 2005

Ladd v Marshall: CA 29 Nov 1954

Conditions for new evidence on appeal At the trial, the wife of the appellant’s opponent said she had forgotten certain events. After the trial she began divorce proceedings, and informed the appellant that she now remembered. He sought either to appeal admitting fresh evidence, or for a retrial. Held: The Court of Appeal refused to … Continue reading Ladd v Marshall: CA 29 Nov 1954

Barclays Mercantile Business Finance Ltd v Mawson (HM Inspector of Taxes): HL 25 Nov 2004

The company had paid substantial sums out in establishing a gas pipeline, and claimed those sums against its tax as capital allowances. The transaction involved a sale and leaseback arrangement which the special commissioners had found to be a pre-arranged series created only for a tax advantage, and the judge at first instance agreed saying … Continue reading Barclays Mercantile Business Finance Ltd v Mawson (HM Inspector of Taxes): HL 25 Nov 2004

Gray (Inspector of Taxes) v Seymours Garden Centre; Chd 10 May 1993

References: Ind Summary 18-Oct-1993, Ind Summary 10-May-1993 Ratio: A glasshouse ‘planteria’ which was used to show plants in a garden centre, was premises and not plant for capital allowances purposes. Statutes: Capital Allowances Act 1990 22 This case cites: Appealed to – Gray (Inspector of Taxes) v Seymours Garden Centre (Horticulture) CA (Times 31-May-95, Gazette … Continue reading Gray (Inspector of Taxes) v Seymours Garden Centre; Chd 10 May 1993