Retired bank employees had previously received free tax advice. When the service was withdrawn, the bank made a payment. The Revenue said that this payment was chargeable to income tax.
Held: The bank’s appeal failed. The payment was made ‘in connection with’ the former employment, and viewing that in context it was a chargeable payment within the retirement benefits scheme. The court discussed how it was to construe the Act: ‘the court should, when interpreting a statutory provision, examine not just that provision but also the context in which it appears in the legislation in question. It may then be able to form a view as to the purpose of the provision in question and that knowledge may inform its thinking as to the choice of meaning to be offered where choices are available. The context of the provision in question, however, will not of itself justify the court in limiting the provision to that context, and thus reducing its apparent scope, unless there is some indication in the legislation that this is what Parliament intended.’
Judges:
May LJ, Arden LJ, Scott Baker LJ
Citations:
[2007] EWCA Civ 442, Times 05-Jun-2007
Links:
Statutes:
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 612(1)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Coventry and Solihull Waste Disposal Company Ltd v Russell HL 25-Nov-1999
Where an electricity supplier operated a waste plant to generate electricity, but still, the predominant use of the plant was for waste disposal, the rates were not to be calculated under the industry’s own special rules, but under those for the . .
Cited – HM Inspector of Taxes v Dextra Accessories Ltd HL 7-Jul-2005
The taxpayer companies had paid funds into a trust for employees. They sought to set off the payments against their liability to corporation tax. The revenue argued that they were deductible only in the year in which they were paid to the employees. . .
Cited – Wales (Inspector of Taxes) v Tilley HL 11-Feb-1943
The taxpayer was managing director of a company. The Revenue sought to tax him on two sums of andpound;20,000 paid by to him by the company. The sums were paid in part as the price of compounding a pension, and in part in consideration of the . .
Cited – Regina v Schildcamp HL 1971
Lord Upjohn considered the duty of the court when considering an Act of Parliament: ‘The task of the court is to ascertain the intention of Parliament; you cannot look at the section, still less a subsection, in isolation, to ascertain that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, Income Tax
Updated: 23 October 2022; Ref: scu.251815
