Click the case name for better results:

Lloyds UDT Finance Limited v Chartered Finance Trust Holdings Plc and others: ChD 22 Nov 2001

The Act restricted the extent to which payment made for the hire of vehicles exceeding certain values could be deducted from profits when calculating tax. Autolease hired cars and then relet them to the public. On the sale of the company the question arose as to whether that restriction might apply only to those cars … Continue reading Lloyds UDT Finance Limited v Chartered Finance Trust Holdings Plc and others: ChD 22 Nov 2001

BMBF (No 24) Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners: ChD 26 Nov 2002

Equipment in Illinois was transferred to a UK company within the same group, then sold and leased back in order to take advantage of capital allowances. The Act provided for a reduction in the allowance where machinery was let to a foreign company, but subsection 3 removed the allowance altogether where the machinery was not … Continue reading BMBF (No 24) Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners: ChD 26 Nov 2002

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

Barclays Mercantile Business Finance Ltd v Mawson (Inspector of Taxes): ChD 22 Jul 2002

The taxpayer sought to claim for capital allowances of andpound;91 million for gas pipelines. The claimant had provided the equipment through a leasing scheme. Held: The leases were unusual, but did not appear to be merely part of a tax avoidance scheme. However, here the company already owned and operated the pipeline, and continued to … Continue reading Barclays Mercantile Business Finance Ltd v Mawson (Inspector of Taxes): ChD 22 Jul 2002

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

H M Inspector of Taxes (Atwood) v Anduff Car Wash Limited: CA 17 Jul 1997

Capital allowances.The taxpayer operated automatic car wash sites. It claimed capital allowances for the entirety of a wash hall, housed within a building incorporating washing machinery and control equipment, and surrounded by tarmac areas used for circulation, queuing and parking. It said that the entire site, or entire wash hall, was a single item of … Continue reading H M Inspector of Taxes (Atwood) v Anduff Car Wash Limited: CA 17 Jul 1997

Attwood (Inspector of Taxes) v Anduff Car Wash Ltd: ChD 11 Dec 1995

No capital allowances for car wash structures. They were part of premises, not plant. Judges: Carnwath J Citations: Times 11-Dec-1995 Statutes: Capital Allowances Act 1990 22 24 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Appeal from – H M Inspector of Taxes (Atwood) v Anduff Car Wash Limited CA 17-Jul-1997 Capital allowances.The taxpayer operated automatic car … Continue reading Attwood (Inspector of Taxes) v Anduff Car Wash Ltd: ChD 11 Dec 1995

Britax International Gmbh v Commissioners of Inland Revenue: CA 31 May 2002

‘The issue in the appeal is as to the true construction of section 35(2) in Chapter III of Part II of the Capital Allowances Act 1990 . . Section 35(2) restricts the extent to which expenditure on the ‘hiring’ of an ‘expensive motor car’ (that is to say, a car the retail price of which … Continue reading Britax International Gmbh v Commissioners of Inland Revenue: CA 31 May 2002

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

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

Melluish (Inspector of Taxes) v BMI (No 3) Ltd and Related Appeals: HL 16 Oct 1995

Chattels which became affixed to a lessee’s land became fixtures, and were not available for tax allowances calculations. Lord Browne-Wilkinson said: ‘The terms expressly or implicitly agreed between the fixer of the chattel and the owner of the land cannot affect the determination of the question whether, in law, the chattel has become a fixture … Continue reading Melluish (Inspector of Taxes) v BMI (No 3) Ltd and Related Appeals: HL 16 Oct 1995

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

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

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