Category: Income Tax

Inland Revenue Commissioners v J Bibby and Sons Limited: HL 17 May 1945

The House was asked whether shares in a company held by directors as trustees could be aggregated with shares held by them beneficially for the purpose of determining whether the directors had ‘a controlling interest’ in the company.
Held:
Russell of Killowen said: ‘When the section speaks of directors having a controlling interest in a company, what it is immediately concerned with in using the words ‘controlling interest’ is not the extent to which the individuals are beneficially interested in the profits of the company as a going concern or in the surplus assets in a winding up, but the extent to which they have vested in them the power of controlling by votes the decisions which will bind the company in the shape of resolutions passed by the shareholders in general meeting. In other words, the test which is to exclude a company’s business from subsection (9)(a) and include it in (9)(b), is the voting power of its directors, not their beneficial interest in the company.
For the purpose of such a test the fact that a vote-carrying share is vested in a director as trustee seems immaterial. The power is there, and though it be exercised in breach of trust or even in breach of an injunction, the vote would be validly cast vis-a-vis the company, and the resolution until rescinded would be binding on it.’
Lord Macmillan said: ‘The question whether the directors of the respondent company have the control of it by their voting power as shareholders must in my view be determined by the memorandum and articles of the company and by the register of shareholders. By the constitution of the company, as I have already mentioned, the voting power is vested in the ordinary shareholders and the register shows that the directors hold a majority of these shares . .
So far as the company is concerned the relation between such of its shareholders as happen to be trustees and their beneficiaries is res inter alios. It may be that a trustee shareholder may, as between himself and his cestuis que trust, be under a duty to exercise his vote in a particular manner, or a shareholder may be bound under contract to vote in a particular way (cf Puddephatt v Leith). But with such restrictions the company has nothing to do. It must accept and act upon the shareholder’s vote notwithstanding that it may be given contrary to some duty which he owes to outsiders. The remedy for such breach lies elsewhere.’
Lord Porter said: ‘The phrase is a composite one and the combination means no more than that the directors must have an interest such as enables them to control the activities of the company: it does not require some personal financial interest on their part which control enables them to exploit. It may be that trustees can ultimately be brought to book for activities which would not lay a beneficial owner open to attack or complaint. Nevertheless for good or ill the trustee like the beneficial owner controls, though if his powers be wrongly exercised they may in some way or other be capable of being challenged.’
Lord Simonds said: ‘What, my Lords, constitutes a controlling interest in a company? It is the power by the exercise of voting rights to carry a resolution at a general meeting of the company. Can the directors of the respondent company by the exercise of their voting rights carry such a resolution? Yes: for they are the registered holders of more than half the ordinary shares of the company. Therefore they have a controlling interest in the company . .
Those who by their votes can control the company do not the less control it because they may themselves be amenable to some external control. Theirs is the control, though in the exercise of it they may be guilty of some breach of obligation whether of conscience or of law. It is impossible (an impossibility long recognised in company law) to enter into an investigation whether the registered holder of a share is to any and what extent the beneficial owner. A clean cut there must be.’

Judges:

Macmillan, Russell of Killowen, Porter, Simonds LL

Citations:

[1945] 1 All ER 667, [1945] UKHL TC – 29 – 167, 29 TC 167

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Distinguished – Bermuda Cablevision Limited and others v Colica Trust Company Limited PC 6-Oct-1997
(Bermuda) An alternative remedy to winding up is available to a shareholder where oppressive conduct is alleged, though the main thrust is that the conduct is unlawful. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax, Company

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221572

Xi Software Ltd v HM Inspector of Taxes: SCIT 3 Dec 2004

SCIT Income Tax – Schedule E – Benefit in kind – Whether expenses paid by company assessable as income of director – Apportionment of expenses – Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 ss.154, 156 – Discovery Assessment – Taxes Management Act 1970, Section 29

Citations:

[2004] UKSC SPC00450

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 154 156

Income Tax

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221423

Cook v HM Inspector of Taxes: SCIT 29 Nov 2004

SCIT INCOME TAX – relief for error or mistake – TMA 1970 s 33 – whether part of claim out of time – yes – whether conditions for relief satisfied – motoring expenses – returns made on basis of actual cost but taxpayer seeking to benefit from fixed profit car scheme – conditions not satisfied – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2004] UKSC SPC00451

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Taxes Management Act 1970 33

Income Tax

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221412

Carvill v HM Inspector of Taxes: SCIT 29 Nov 2004

SCIT COSTS – Special Commissioners’ power to award costs – Revenue withdrew opposition to appeal shortly before hearing – Appellant claimed costs of proceedings while matter was before Special Commissioners – Matter had been before Special Commissioners for nearly four years – Whether costs claimed by Appellant were costs ‘of and incidental to a hearing’ – Yes – Whether Revenue had acted wholly unreasonably in connection with hearing – Yes – Special Commissioners (Jurisdiction and Procedure) Regulations 1994, SI 1994/1811, reg 21(1)

Citations:

[2004] UKSC SPC00447

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Special Commissioners (Jurisdiction and Procedure) Regulations 1994 21(1)

Income Tax, Costs

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221411

Cadbury Schweppes Plc and Another v HM Inspector of Taxes: SCIT 9 Nov 2004

SCIT TRANSFERS OF SECURITIES – loan notes provided for a fixed rate of interest of 7.43375% from issue to redemption but also provided for interest to be paid on irregular days and in irregular amounts – whether loan notes carried interest at a rate which was a fixed rate which was the same throughout the period from issue to redemption – no – whether inspector made a just and reasonable determination – yes – appeal dismissed – ICTA 1988 S717(2)(a) and (9)

Citations:

[2004] UKSC SPC00441

Links:

Bailii

Income Tax

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.221410

Harrison v Lilley: HL 11 Jul 1952

HL Income Tax, Schedule D – Foreign securities and possessions – Arrears of interest on mortgage bonds of foreign company-Payment of arrears postponed by arrangement and made after bonds had been cancelled and replaced by a promissory note – Whether interest assessable – Income Tax Act, 1918 (8 and 9 Geo. V, c. 40), Schedule D, Cases IV and V.

Citations:

[1952] UKHL TC – 33 – 344, [1952] WN 383, 33 TC 344

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Tax Act 1918

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.560161

Bray (H M Inspector of Taxes) v Colenbrander; Harvey (H M Inspector of Taxes) v Breyfogle: HL 20 Apr 1953

HL Income Tax – Residents in the United Kingdom employed by foreign companies under contracts made abroad – Duties performed entirely or mainly in United Kingdom – Remuneration payable abroad – Whether employment assessable under Schedule E or Case V of Schedule D.

Citations:

[1953] UKHL TC – 34 – 138

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.560152

Albion Rovers Football Club Ltd v Inland Revenue: HL 11 Jul 1952

HL Income Tax Schedule D, and Profits Tax-Deduction – Football club – Players engaged under yearly agreements – Change of renewal date – Agreements for a period exceeding 12 months and including two non-playing periods – Accounting period to which debits for non-playing wages to be allocated in computing profits.

Citations:

[1952] UKHL TC – 33 – 331, 33 TC 331

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.560160

Inland Revenue v Gordon: HL 26 Mar 1952

HL Income Tax, Schedule D – Foreign possessions-Remittances- Loans by bank in United Kingdom transferred from time to time to borrower’s account at branch abroad and satisfied by income receipts there – Income Tax Act 1918 (8 and 9 Geo. V, c. 40), Schedule D, Case V, Rule 2.

Citations:

[1952] UKHL TC – 33 – 226

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Tax Act 1918

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.560158

Inland Revenue v City of Glasgow Police Athletic Association: HL 9 Mar 1953

HL Income Tax – Exemption – Charitable purposes – Police Athletic Association – Finance Act, 1921 (11 and 12 Geo. V, c. 17), Section 30 (1) (c); Finance Act, 1927 (17 and 18 Geo. V, c. 10), Section 24.

Citations:

[1953] UKHL TC – 34 – 76, 34 TC 76

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Finance Act 1921 30(1)(c), Finance Act 1927 24

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax, Charity

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.560150

Young (H M Inspector of Taxes) v Racecourse Betting Control Board; Racecourse Betting Control Board v Young (H M Inspector of Taxes); Inland Revenue v Racecourse Betting Control Board: HL 29 Jul 1959

HL Income Tax, Schedule D, and Profits Tax-Trade-Expenses-Payments made under scheme for application of moneys in totalisator fund-Runners’ allowance-Whether payments deductible as expenses in computing profits- Racecourse Betting Act, 1928 (18 and 19 Geo. V, c. 41), Section 3 ; Income Tax Act, 1952 (15 and 16 Geo. VI cfe 1 Eliz. II, c. 10), Section 137 (a).

Citations:

[1959] UKHL TC – 38 – 426

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.559975

Dale v Inland Revenue: HL 20 Jul 1953

HL Special Contribution – Payments to trustee under a will – Whether investment income – Income Tax Act, 1918 (8 and 9 Geo. V, c. 40), Section 14 (3); Finance Act, 1948 (11 and 12 Geo. VI, c. 49), Sections 49 (1) and 68 (2).

Citations:

[1953] UKHL TC – 34 – 468

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Tax Act 1918 14(3), Finance Act 1948 4991) 68(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.560155

Potts’ Executors v Inland Revenue: HL 14 Dec 1950

HL Surtax – Settlement – Payments by a body corporate connected with a settlement made to third parties at settlor’s request and debited to his current account with the company-Whether payments constitute capital sums paid directly or indirectly to the settlor – Finance Act, 1938 (1 and 2 Geo. VI, c. 46), Section 40.

Citations:

[1950] UKHL TC – 32 – 211

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.560168

Fenwick v Inland Revenue: HL 20 Jul 1953

HL Special Contribution – Aggregate investment income – Whether dividends receivable in the year 1947-48 represented more than the income attributable to one full year if such income were deemed to have accrued from day to day – What constitutes ‘ a full year’s income – Finance Act, 1948 (11 and 12 Geo. VI, c. 49), Section 61 (1).

Citations:

[1953] UKHL TC – 34 – 411, 34 TC 411

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Finance Act 1948 61(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.560156

Atkinson (H M Inspector of Taxes) v Goodlass Wall and Lead Industries, Ltd: HL 23 Jun 1950

HL Income Tax, Schedule D, Case V – Dividends from foreign companies – Acquisition of a new source of income or of an addition to a source ‘ in ‘ any year of assessment ‘-Finance Act, 1926 (16 and 17 Geo. V, c. 22), Section 30, proviso (ii), and Section 29.

Citations:

[1950] UKHL TC – 31 – 447, 31 TC 447

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.560166

Littman v Barron (H M Inspector of Taxes): HL 31 Jul 1952

HL Income Tax, Schedule D-Property held on short lease and re-let at a rent lower than that payable by lessee-Whether ‘loss ‘can be set against other income chargeable under Schedule D, Case VI – Finance Act, 1927 (17 and 18 Geo. V. c. 10), Section 27 (1); Finance Act, 1940 (3 cfe 4 Geo. VI. c. 29), Section 15.

Citations:

[1952] UKHL TC – 33 – 373, 33 TC 373

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.560162

Asia Mill Ltd v Ryan (Inspector of Taxes): HL 28 Jun 1951

HL Income Tax, Schedule D – Purchases of stocks of cotton from Cotton Controller – Provision for adjusting payments to be made in event of subsequent change in price of cotton – Sum paid to Controller under this arrangement – Whether part of cost of stock-in-trade.

Citations:

[1951] UKHL TC – 32 – 275, [1951] WN 390, 32 TC 275

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.560163

Inland Revenue v Hood Barrs: HL 6 Jul 1961

Income Tax – Procedure – Repayment claim – Loss in trade – Losses certified by General Commissioners without hearing Inspector – Whether appeal in nature of Certiorari lies to Court of Session – Whether certificates valid – Court of Exchequer (Scotland) Act, 1856 (19 and 20 Viet. c. 56), Section 17; Income Tax Act, 1918 (8 and 9 Geo. V, c. 40), Section 34.

Citations:

[1961] UKHL TC – 39 – 683

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Tax Act 1918, Court of Exchequer (Scotland) Act 1856

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.559963

Wilson (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Clayton: CA 7 Dec 2004

The claim against the defendant at the tribunal had been settled by a compromise which had then been the subject of an order by the tribunal. The Revenue sought to charge the payment to income tax.
Held: It had been paid ‘in connection with’ the termination of his employment, was less than pounds 30,000 and so was outside a charge to tax. S131(1) extended the meaning of ’emolument’ and the extended meaning included such payments.

Judges:

Lord Justice Peter Gibson Lady Justice Arden Lord Justice Clarke

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 1657, Times 12-Jan-2005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 148

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Wilson (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Clayton ChD 29-Apr-2004
Taxability of compensation paid on compromise of claims after dismissal. The employer introduced new terms, withdrawing car benefits. Having refused the new terms the taxpayer was dismissed. A tribunal held him unfairly dismissed. The council . .
Cited – Shilton v Wilmshurst HL 7-Feb-1991
The taxpayer was transferred from one football club to another. He was paid andpound;75,000 to persuade him to move. The revenue appealed a decision that this was not a sum taxable as an emolument under Schedule E by the new employer.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax, Employment

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.220054

Scottish Provident Institution v Allan: HL 30 Apr 1903

A mutual insurance society in Scotland was assessed for income tax under the fourth case of Schedule D of the Income Tax Act 1842 upon certain sums remitted to them from Australia in 1898. They maintained that they were not liable to be so assessed, upon the ground that the sums so remitted were not remitted in payment of interest but in repayment of capital. Between 1885 and 1890 the society had sent various sums to Australia for investment. The interest on these investments was received by the society’s representatives in Australia and paid into a bank account there, and prior to 1893 it was not brought to this country but invested in Australia. In and after 1893 certain sums were remitted to Scotland from Australia, and in 1898 the sum upon which income tax was now claimed was so remitted. After all these remittances had been made there still remained in Australia a sum greater than the total of all the sums originally sent out for investment. Held ( aff. judgment of the First Division) that the remittances to this country having been made by the representatives of the society from their bank account in Australia, in which repayments of capital had been immixed with interest, and the particular remittances not having been definitely identified with any particular repayments of capital, the proper inference in the circumstances was that the remittances were made in payment of interest, and that the society was liable to be assessed for income tax upon the sums remitted.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Halsbury), Lord Shand, Lord Davey, and Lord Robertson

Citations:

[1903] UKHL 605, [1903] UKHL TC – 4 – 591, 4 TC 591, 40 SLR 605

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Income Tax

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.630576

Inland Revenue v Collco Dealings, Ltd ; Inland Revenue v Lucbor Dealings, Ltd: HL 2 Mar 1961

HL Income Tax – Dividend – stripping-Repayment of tax deducted from dividends claimed by companies resident in the Republic of Ireland – Income Tax Act, 1952 (15 and 16 Geo. VI and 1 Eliz. II, c. 10), Section 349 and Eighteenth Schedule, Part I, Paragraph 1 (a); Finance (No. 2) Act, 1955 (4 and 5 Eliz. II, c. 17), Section 4 (2).

Citations:

[1961] UKHL TC – 39 – 509

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Tax Act 1952

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.559962

Rye and Eyre v Inland Revenue: HL 1 Mar 1935

TC Income Tax, Schedule D – Copyright royalties – Play produced in London – Royalties transmitted by producer’s solicitors to author resident abroad – Whether solicitors persons ‘by or through ‘ whom payment made – Income Tax Act, 1918 General Rule 21; Finance Act, 1927 (17 and 18 Geo. V, c. 10), Sections 25 and 26

Citations:

[1935] UKHL TC – 19 – 164

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property, Income Tax

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.559342

Edwards (Inspector of Taxes) v Clinch: HL 22 Oct 1981

Income tax, Schedule E – Office – Inspector appointed to hold public local inquiries by Secretary of State for the Environment – Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970, s 181(1).

Citations:

[1981] UKHL TC – 56 – 367, [1981] 3 All ER 543, [1981] STC 617, [1982] AC 845, [1981] 3 WLR 707, [1981] TR 393, 56 TC 367

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970 181(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.559845

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Garvin and Rose: HL 14 May 1981

HL Income tax and surtax – Transactions in securities – Tax advantage – Counteraction – Sale of shares in property companies – Subsequent payments of abnormal dividends by property companies – Whether relevant circumstances present – Whether sale of shares transactions ‘whereby’ another person received abnormal dividends – Whether purchase price of shares received ‘in connection with’ re-acquisition by vendors of shares of assets of property companies – Whether property companies were at material time companies to which para of s 461 applies – Insufficient evidence in Case Stated – Whether onus on taxpayer or Crown – Whether tax advantages obtained – Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970, s 460, paras C and D of s 461, proviso to para D(2) ofs 461, s 466 and s 467(2).

Citations:

[1981] UKHL TC – 55 – 24, [1981] TR 215, [1981] WLR 793, 55 TC 24, [1981] STC 344

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.559844

HM Revenue and Customs v Larkstar Data Ltd: ChD 24 Nov 2008

Appeal by HMRC from a decision of the General Commissioners allowing an appeal by Larkstar Data Ltd against a determination by HMRC of liability to income tax under PAYE regulations and social security contributions

Judges:

Sir Donald Rattee

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 3284 (Ch), [2009] BTC 415, [2009] STC 1161

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.304552

Templeton (Inspector of Taxes) v Transform Shop Office and Bar Fitters Ltd: ChD 15 Jul 2005

The contractor had not met its liabilities to pay PAYE. The general commissioners had nevertheless granted a construction industry certificate under sections 561 and 565, having found an informal agreement to allow late payments.
Held: No tax was now outstanding. The taxpayer had a turnover of andpound;5 million a year, but would be bankrupt without the certificate. The infringements could be regarded as minor and technical. That conclusion was not so far wide of the mark as to justify interference.

Judges:

Hart J

Citations:

Times 20-Sep-2005, [2005] EWHC 1558 (Ch)

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 561 565

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Edwards (Inspector of Taxes) v Bairstow HL 25-Jul-1955
The House was asked whether a particular transaction was ‘an adventure in the nature of trade’.
Held: Although the House accepted that this was ‘an inference of fact’, on the primary facts as found by the Commissioners ‘the true and only . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax, Construction

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.230100

Peakviewing (Interactive) Ltd and others v Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport: CA 28 Nov 2002

The Secretary of State had refused to grant a certifate as to a file under the 1985 Act thus disallowing certain capital allowances. The Rules said that a decision of the High Court would be final.

Judges:

Kennedy, Jonathan Parker LJJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 1864

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Films Act 1985 Sch 1, Supreme Court Act 1981 16(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – CS v ACS and Another FD 16-Apr-2015
Rule Against Appeal was Ultra Vires
W had applied to have set aside the consent order made on her ancillary relief application accusing the husband of material non-disclosure. She complained that her application to have the order varied had been refused on the ground that her only . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax, Media, Litigation Practice

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.217857

Sceptre Associates Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 23 Dec 2013

FTTTx PAYE – late submission of Employer’s Annual Return – whether scale of penalty is reasonable, and whether penalty is unfair and should be reduced – Decision of Upper Tribunal in Hok Ltd applies. Whether reasonable excuse for late submission of return – No.

Citations:

[2014] UKFTT 36 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.519574

Leeds Innovation Centre Ltd and Others v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 20 Dec 2013

FTTTx Income tax and NI – cheap loans – employee benefit trust – discount agreement – was interest or discount paid – was re financing payment – was interest paid for relevant years of assessment – held – payments under discount agreement interest for tax purposes – refinancing did not amount to payment -no interest paid for relevant years – appeals dismissed.

Citations:

[2014] UKFTT 9 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.519565

Jackson v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 5 Jan 2012

FTTTx INCOME TAX – SURCHARGE FOR LATE PAYMENT OF TAX – Did HMRC discharge its burden of proof on whether the tax remained unpaid on the day following the expiry of 28 days from due date – No – should the Appeal be adjourned to clarify the ambiguity – No – Appeal allowed

Citations:

[2012] UKFTT 23 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.450808

Huan v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 22 Sep 2011

Income tax – Application for enquiry closure notice – s 28A TMA 1970 – Joint working of enquiries into income tax, VAT and employer compliance – Investigation covering several taxes and closure application covering only one aspect of the enquiries – Whether income tax enquiry should be closed

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 626 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.449561

Lomax v Peter Dixon and Son Ltd: CA 1942

A substantial loan was made to be repaid on demand. An agreement was then made where the debtor issued to the creditor 680 loan notes of andpound;500 each, amounting in total to andpound;340,000 (a discount of 6%). The notes were to bear interest at a rate of about 5 per cent. 100 were to be repaid almost immediately and the rest over a period of 20 years. Each note was to be redeemed at a premium of 20% if the debtor’s profits reached a specified level. The issue was whether the discount and premium were capital or income for income tax purposes.
Held: In considering what might be a normal return, it was necessary to consider the circumstances of the transaction or the terms of the security and each case had to be considered on its own facts. Lord Greene discussed the ordinary issue of debentures by a limited company. If the credit of the company was good and the security ample then the issue could be at par at a reasonable rate of interest. If the credit and the security were exceptionally good then the issue could be made at a premium, which would be capital because the subscriber would be getting a good security. Alternatively such a company could issue its debentures at par with a lower rate of interest. If the credit or security were not good then the company could issue the debentures at par but with a high rate of interest, or issue them at a discount with a normal rate of interest, or issue them at par with a premium on redemption. However, the premium on redemption and the premium on issue were the expression of the risk in terms of capital rather than in the terms of interest. Whether income tax was payable depended on the method chosen by the company. The discount and premium in that appeal were capital.

Judges:

Lord Greene MR

Citations:

[1943] 2 All ER 255, [1943] KB 671, [1942] 25 TC 353

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Inland Revenue Commissioners v Sema Group Pension Scheme Trustees CA 19-Dec-2002
The taxpayers appealed a notice under section 703(3) to counteract the tax advantage received by them from a share buy-back scheme. The scheme was an approved pension scheme, under which the quoted company agreed to buy back its own shares.
Cited – Omega Group Pension Scheme v Inland Revenue SCIT 22-Jun-2001
SCIT TRANSACTIONS IN SECURITIES – share buy-backs – trustees of exempt approved scheme purchased shares in Powergen which subsequently bought back the shares – trustees claimed tax credit – whether the scheme . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Trusts, Income Tax

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.235781

Dewar v Commissioners for Inland Revenue: CA 1935

The executor had been left a legacy of andpound;1,000,000 free of duty. When it came due to be paid, he was entitled to interest at 4%, but did not claim the interest. He was assessed to surtax on the sum he could have received.
Held: Since he had not received the sum, he was not to be taxed upon it. Lord Hanworth MR remarked: ”receivability’ without receipt is nothing.’

Judges:

Lord Hanworth MR

Citations:

[1935] 2 KB 351, 19 TC 561

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Revenue and Customs v DCC Holdings (UK) Ltd SC 15-Dec-2010
The taxpayer had entered into a ‘repo’ loan to its bank, agreeing to purchase a block of gilt edged securities, and to resell them at a later date at a fixed figure. The profit and figures included an allowance for the interest payments to be made. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.235782

Mallalieu v Drummond: CA 1983

The taxpayer, a lady barrister, sought to set off against her liability to tax, the cost of purchasing clothing which she would only wear at court in accordance with professional requirements. The clothing although subdued consisted of perfectly ordinary articles of apparel suitable for everyday wear. But for the requirements of her profession that she should be so clothed for her court appearances and for the fact that she would have been barred from pleading in court if she had not been so clothed, the tax payer would have not purchased those clothes. The tax payer had an ample supply of other clothes to keep her in comfort and decency. The preservation of warmth and decency was not a consideration which crossed her mind when she bought the clothes.
Held: After summarising the General Commissioner’s findings of fact, the Master of the Rolls continued: ‘From those findings of fact there is in my judgment only one reasonable conclusion to be drawn, namely, that the taxpayer’s sole purpose in incurring the expenditure was a professional purpose, any other benefit being purely incidental.’

Citations:

[1983] STC 124, [1983] 1 WLR 252

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970 130(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Mallalieu v Drummond HL 27-Jul-1983
The taxpayer was a barrister. To comply with Bar guidance on court dress, she wore, in court and in and to and from chambers black dresses, suits and shoes and white blouses. The clothing were perfectly ordinary articles suitable for everyday wear. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax

Leading Case

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.266052

Strong and Co of Romsey Ltd v Woodifield: CA 26 Jun 1905

The compamy operated public houses. It became liable to pay damages for injuries paid to a visitor, and sought to set the cost off against income tax.
Held: The Commissioners had been correct to refuse to allow the company to set the sums off against tax.

Citations:

[1904-7] All ER Rep 953

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Strong and Co of Romsey Ltd v Woodifield HL 30-Jul-1906
The company sought to deduct from its trading profits a sum expended paying damages for personal injuries to a visitor to the taxpayer’s Inn. The claim had been rejected.
Held: The company’s appeal failed. Lord Davey said: ‘I think that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax

Updated: 23 June 2022; Ref: scu.235908

Siwek (T/A Siwek Ltd) v Inland Revenue: SCIT 8 Sep 2004

SCIT Income Tax; tax return; enquiry into returns; requests for information; notice requiring the production of documents; failure to produce adequate or sufficient information and documents; enquiry closed; notice amending return; appeal against amended self assessment; Taxes Management Act 1970 Sections 9A, 19A, 28A, 114; Notices of Determination under Regulations 49 and 55 of the Income Tax (Employments) Regulations 1993; Notice of Decision relating to National Insurance Contributions.

Citations:

[2004] UKUKSPC SPC00427

Links:

Bailii

Income Tax

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.213735

Marks v HM Inspector of Taxes: SCIT 8 Sep 2004

SCIT Income tax – loss relief – TA 1988 s 574 – whether allowable loss for capital gains tax purposes
Capital gains tax – whether shares becoming of negligible value – whether claim made – form of claim – whether date specified
Capital gains tax – whether share issue a bargain other than at arm’s length – whether a reorganisation
Jurisdiction – estoppel – whether available against Crown – conditions for claim based on ‘legitimate expectation’ – method of seeking remedies

Citations:

[2004] UKUKSPC SPC00428, [2004] STI 2259, [2004] STC (SCD) 503

Links:

Bailii

Income Tax, Capital Gains Tax

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.213734

Christensen (Inspector of Taxes) v Vasili: ChD 19 Mar 2004

The taxpayer’s employer had created a scheme to provide to him with a motor vehicle, but seeking to reduce his liabilty for income tax. The company purchased two cars and transferred to him a five per cent interest in each for which he paid. The cars were rather later sold to him at an independent valuation.
Held: The scheme failed. The situation of co-ownership of a car had not been anticipated by parliament. A special regime had been established for cars, and could reasionably be interpreted to encompass the present case. The revenue were correct, and the benefit was taxable.

Judges:

Pumfrey J

Citations:

Times 15-Apr-2004

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 157 168D

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Vasili v Hm Inspector of Taxes SCIT 15-Aug-2003
. .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Vasili v Hm Inspector of Taxes SCIT 15-Aug-2003
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.195752

Inverclyde’s (Lord) Trustees v Millar (Inspector of Taxes): HL 31 Mar 1924

Income Tax (Schedule D, Case III)-Deduction–Interest on unpaid Estate Duty-Finance Act, 1896 (59 and 60 Viet., c. 28), Section 18 (1)- Income Tax Act, 1918 (8 and 9 Geo. V, c. 40), Section 209, Schedule D, Case III, Rule 2, and Rule 19 of the General Rides.

Citations:

[1924] UKHL TC – 9 – 14, [1924] AC 580, 9 TC 14

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.631554

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Helical Bar Ltd: HL 22 Mar 1972

HL Income tax, Schedule D – Profits of trade – Basis of assessment – Change of accounting date – Period included in basis years for two years of assessment – Whether double taxation involved – Income Tax Act 1952 (15 and 16 Geo. 6 and 1 Eliz. 2, c. 10), s. 127.

Citations:

[1972] UKHL TC – 48 – 221, 48 TC 221, [1972] AC 773, [1972] 2 WLR 880, [1972] TR 1, [1972] 1 All ER 1205

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.559821

Banning v Wright: HL 14 Jun 1972

HL Income tax, Schedule D – Excess rents – Case V III rents – Sublease rents – Subletting in breach of covenants in head lease – Payments to head lessor in consideration of subsequent consent – Whether paid as consideration for variation or waiver of lease terms – Income Tax Act 1952 (15 6 16 Geo. 6 and 1 Eliz. 2, c.10), s.1 7 5 ; Finance Act 1963 (c.25), 5.20(6) and 22(4) and Sch. 4, paras. 8 and 9.

Citations:

[1972] UKHL TC – 48 – 421, 48 TC 421, [1972] TR 10, [1972] 2 All ER 987, [1972] 1 WLR 972

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.559823

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Goodwin: HL 28 Jan 1976

HL Surtax – Tax advantage – Counteraction – Bonus issue o f redeemable preference shares followed by redemption – Main object to avoid loss of fam ily control through sales to meet estate duty – Whether a commercial object – Married woman not separately assessed – Whether redemption moneys subject to counteraction – Finance A ct 1960 (8 and 9 Eliz. 2, c. 44), ss. 28 and 43(4)(g); Finance Act 1962 (10 and 11 Eliz. 2, c. 44), s. 25(4).

Citations:

[1976] UKHL TC – 50 – 583, [1976] STC 28, [1976] TR 1, 50 TC 583, [1976] 1 WLR 191, [1976] 1 All ER 481

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.559833

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Church Commissioners for England: HL 7 Jul 1976

HL Income tax – Capital or income – Rentcharges – Payable for 10 years – Paid as consideration for sale of capital assets – Whether containing a capital element – Whether wholly payable under deduction o f tax – Income Tax Act 1952 (15 and 16 Geo. 6 and 1 Eliz. 2, c. 10), 177.

Citations:

[1976] UKHL TC – 50 – 516, [1976] 2 All ER 1037, [1976] STC 339, [1976] TR 187, [1977] AC 329, [1976] 3 WLR 214

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.559834

Pearlberg v Varty (Inspector of Taxes): HL 22 Mar 1972

HL Income tax – Procedure – Back duty – Neglect – Assessments made after six years, but within six years of determination of assessment for normal year – Taxpayer not entitled to make representations on application for leave to assess out of time – Finance Act 1960 (8 and 9 Eliz. 2, c.44), 5.51(3); Income T ax Management Act 1964 (c.37), 5.6.

Citations:

[1972] UKHL TC – 48 – 14

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.559822

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Brander and Cruickshank (A Firm): HL 8 Dec 1970

HL Income tax, Schedule D – Profits of profession – Law agents – Also acting as secretaries and registrars of companies – Compensation for loss of registrarships – Whether receipt of profession – Whether registrarships offices.

Citations:

[1970] UKHL TC – 46 – 574, 1971 SC (HL) 30, [1971] 1 All ER 36, 1971 SLT 53, 46 TC 574, [1971] 1 WLR 212

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax, Legal Professions

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.559825

Sasin v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 29 Jul 2010

FTTTx INCOME TAX – Income Tax (Pay as You Earn) Regulations 2003 — Obligation of employer to deduct tax in accordance with the Regulations by reference to the employee’s code – Notification of change of tax code for particular employee not received by employer – Subsequent general notices P9X and P7X received by employer indicating that former tax code no longer valid and that HMRC should be contacted – Employer failing to contact HMRC or to use the correct tax code – Whether employer took reasonable care to comply with the Regulations (regulation 21(3)(a)) – No- Appeal dismissed.

Citations:

[2010] UKFTT 354 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Tax (Pay as You Earn) Regulations 2003 21(3)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.422338

Smith (Surveyor of Taxes) v Lion Brewery Co: HL 14 Feb 1911

A brewery company were, as part of their business, and as a necessary incident of the profitable exploitation of such business, the owners of certain licensed premises. These premises, which were let by the company to tenants as tied houses for the retail sale of the company’s beer, ‘had been acquired by the company and were held by them solely for the purposes of their said business.’ Under section 3 of the Licensing Act 1904 the company became compelled to pay a portion of the annual compensation levy, amounting, in respect of the various licensed premises, to pounds 3600. The Income Tax Commissioners allowed a deduction of pounds 1200 from the company’s assessments, and stated the facts above-mentioned in a special case.
Held (on an equal division of the House of Lords affirming the Court of Appeal) that on the facts as stated the compensation levy falling upon the company under the Licensing Act was ‘money wholly and exclusively laid out or expended for the purposes of’ the company’s brewery business, and was therefore a proper deduction in terms of the Income Tax Act 1842, sec. 100, Sched. D, case 2, rule 1.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), the Earl of Halsbury, Lords Atkinson and Shaw

Citations:

[1911] UKHL 1083, 48 SLR 1083

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.619187

Laidler v Perry: HL 8 Apr 1965

HL Income Tax, Schedule E – Christmas gift voucher – Whether assessable – Income Tax Act, 1952 (15 and 16 Geo. VI and 1 Eliz. II, c. 10), Section 156; Finance Act, 1956 (4 and 5 Eliz. II, c. 54), Second Schedule, Paragraph 1(1).
Lord Reid said: ‘There is a wealth of authority on this matter and various glosses on or paraphrases of the words in the Act appear in judicial opinions, including speeches in this House. No doubt they were helpful in the circumstances of the cases in which they were used, but in the end we must always return to the words in the statute . . ‘

Citations:

[1965] UKHL TC – 42 – 351, 42 TC 351, [1966] AC 16, [1965] 2 All ER 121, [1965] 2 WLR 1171

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Finance Act 1956, Income Tax Act 1952

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – RFC 2012 Plc (Formerly The Rangers Football Club Plc) v Advocate General for Scotland SC 5-Jul-2017
The Court was asked whether an employee’s remuneration is taxable as his or her emoluments or earnings when it is paid to a third party in circumstances in which the employee had no prior entitlement to receive it himself or herself.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.559794

Mapp (Inspector of Taxes) v Oram: HL 23 Jul 1969

HL Income Tax – Child allowance – Income of child – Foreign employment – No remittance to United Kingdom – Whether child ‘entitled . . . to an income’ Income Tax Act 1952 (15 and 16 Geo. 6 and 1 Eliz. 2, c. 10), s. 212(4).

Citations:

[1969] UKHL TC – 45 – 651

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Tax Act 1952 212(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.559811

Wiseman v Borneman: HL 29 Jul 1969

HL Surtax – Procedure – Tax advantage – Counteraction – Reference to Tribunal on whether prima facie case for prcx:eeding – Taxpayer not entitled to be heard by Tribunal or to see certificate and counter-statement of Commissioners of Inland Revenue before decision reached – Finance A ct 1960 C (8 and 9 Eliz. 2 c. 44). s. 28(4) and (5).

Citations:

[1969] UKHL TC – 45 – 540, [1969] TR 279, [1971] AC 297, 45 TC 540, [1969] 3 All ER 275, [1969] 3 WLR 706

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Finance Act 1960

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.559812

CHW (Huddersfield) Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners: HL 20 Jun 1963

Surtax – Undistributed income of trading company – Control transferred during accounting period to company outside Section 245, Income Tax Act, 1952 – Whether income can be apportioned to members prior to transfer – Resolution to pay no dividend on ordinary shares followed by resolution at later date to pay a dividend – Whether dividend paid within reasonable time – Income Tax Act, 1952 (15 and 16 Geo. V I and l Eliz. II, c.10), Sections 245, 248(1) and 256(2)(c)(i) and (4)

Citations:

[1963] UKHL TC – 41 – 92

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Tax Act 1952 245

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.559258

BSC Footwear Ltd v Ridgway: HL 5 May 1971

HL Income tax, Schedule D – Stock valuation – Market value – Retailer – Whether market value can be taken as value in wholesale market.

Citations:

[1971] UKHL TC – 47 – 495, [1972] AC 544, [1971] 2 WLR 1313, 47 TC 495, [1971] 2 All ER 534

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.559813

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Europcopy Plc: ChD 12 Feb 1992

A proposed amendment allowing a reduction in length of employees’ share options within a company scheme was disapproved. The nature of such schemes required certainty as to the rights and reliefs granted, and this was in effect a rescission of the original scheme and replacement by a new one.

Citations:

Gazette 12-Feb-1992

Statutes:

Finance Act 1984 38

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.82342

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Reed International Plc: ChD 10 Mar 1994

Change in the employees’ share option scheme allowed the Inland Revenue to withdraw approval.
Inland Revenue may refuse approval to amendment of share option schemes.

Citations:

Ind Summary 21-Mar-1994, Times 10-Mar-1994

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.82359

Bates v Inland Revenue Commissioners: HL 1968

Section 402, on its plain meaning, produced results in some cases which were ‘monstrous’ and which Parliament can never have intended. The Commissioners had not sought to amend the legislation, but realising the monstrous result of giving effect to the true construction of the section, worked out what they consider to be an equitable way of operating it which seems to them to result in a fair system of taxation. The court per Lord Upohn, could not understand upon what principle they couldproperly do so.
The words ‘if the income of the body corporate’ were therefore seen as capable of meaning either the whole of the income or some only of the income.

Judges:

Lord Upjohn, Lord Reid

Citations:

[1968] AC 483

Statutes:

Income Tax Act 1952 402

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina on the Application of Wilkinson v The Commissioners of Inland Revenue CA 18-Jun-2003
The claimant had not received the same tax allowance following his wife’s death as would have been received by a woman surviving her husband. That law had been declared incompatible with Human Rtights law as discriminatory, but the respondent . .
Cited – Vestey v Inland Revenue Commissioners ChD 1979
The case concerned section 478, which had monstrous and unintended results, if applied in accordance with its natural meaning. The Commissioners did not seek to apply the section in a manner which produced such results. The court held: ‘One should . .
Cited – (Un-named) R(FC) 1/91 SSCS 17-Jan-1991
SSCS Income – earnings of self-employed earner – whether motoring expenses and telephone expenses for both business and personal use may be apportioned – whether bad debts deductible – whether capital drawings . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax, Constitutional

Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.184327

Atherton v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 12 Feb 2019

INCOME TAX – discovery assessment – whether new discovery made or discovery ‘stale’ – whether insufficiency in tax return ‘brought about’ by carelessness of taxpayer or person acting on his behalf – appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2019] UKUT 41 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.635220

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Coathew Investments Ltd: HL 31 Mar 1966

Surtax – Investment company – Computation of actual income – Deduction – Annual payment under voluntary covenant – Beneficiary not an individual – Income Tax Act 1952 (15 and 6 Geo. 6 c 1 Eliz. 2, c. 10), ss. 245, 248, 255(3), 262 and 45 .

Citations:

[1966] UKHL TC – 43 – 301, [1966] 1 WLR 716, [1966] 1 All ER 1032, [1966] TR 81, (1966) 43 TC 301

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.559800

BW Nobes and Co Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners: HL 15 Dec 1965

HL Income tax – Annual payment – Payment charged against capital in payer’s accounts – Profits exceeding annual paym ent but less than aggregate of annual paym ent and dividend paid – W hether annual paym ent made wholly out of taxed profits – Income Tax A ct 1952 (15 and 16 Geo. 6 and 1 Eliz. 2, c. 10), s. 170.

Citations:

[1965] UKHL TC – 43 – 133, [1966] 1 WLR 111, [1966] 1 All ER 30, 43 TC 133

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.559797

Bishop (Inspector of Taxes) v Finsbury Securities Ltd: HL 26 Jul 1966

HL Income tax, Schedule D – Loss in trade – Dealer in shares – Dividendstripping – Forward-stripping – Whether shares acquired as stock-in-trade – Income Tax Act 1952 (15 and 16 Geo. 6 and 1 Eliz. 2, c. 10), s. 341.

Citations:

[1966] UKHL TC – 43 – 591, [1966] 1 WLR 1402, [1966] 3 All ER 105, 43 TC 591

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.559801

Thomson (Inspector of Taxes) v Gurneville Securities Ltd: HL 21 Oct 1971

Income Tax, Schedule D – Loss in trade – Dealer in securities – Dividend-stripping – Shares acquired as part of tax avoidance scheme – Whether stock in-trade – Income Tax Act 1952 (15 and 16 Geo. 6 and 1 Eliz. 2 , c. 10), s .341.

Citations:

[1971] UKHL TC – 47 – 633, 47 TC 633, [1971] 3 WLR 692, [1972] AC 661, [1971] TR 299, [1971] 3 All ER 1071

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Tax Act 1952

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.559820

Campbell (Trustees of Davies Education Trust) v Inland Revenue Commissioners: HL 23 Oct 1968

HL Income tax – Annual payment – Payments agreed to be applied in purchasing payer’s business – Whether payable under deduction of tax – Income Tax Act 1952 (15 and 16 Geo. 6 and I Eliz. 2, c. 10), ss. 169 and 447(1)(6).

Citations:

[1968] UKHL TC – 45 – 427, [1968] 3 All ER 588[1968] UKHL TC – 45 – 427,, [1970] AC 77, [1968] 3 WLR 1025, 45 TC 427, [1968] TR 327

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Tax Act 1952

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.559808

Varty (Inspector of Taxes) v British South Africa Co: HL 13 May 1965

HL Income Tax, Schedule D – Finance company – Loan granted in return for option to subscribe at par for shares in borrower – Option exercised, and loan correspondingly reduced, when shares standing at premium – Whether profit realised.

Citations:

[1965] UKHL TC – 42 – 406, [1965] 2 All ER 395, 42 TC 406, [1965] 3 WLR 47, [1966] AC 381

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.559795

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Brebner: HL 23 Feb 1967

HL Surtax – Tax advantage – Counteraction – Capitalisation of profits by company followed by reduction and repayment of capital – Funds required to finance offer in opposition to takeover bid – Whether bona fide commercial transactions – Whether tax advantage a main object – Finance Act 1960 (8 and 9 Eliz. 2, c. 44), 28.

Citations:

[1967] UKHL TC – 43 – 705, [1967] 2 WLR 1001, [1967] 1 All ER 779, 1967 SC (HL) 31, [1967] 2 AC 18, 43 TC 705, 1967 SLT 113

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Finance Act 1960 28

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.559804

Regent Oil Co Ltd v Strick (Inspector of Taxes): HL 27 Jul 1965

HL Income tax, Schedule D – Profits tax – Deduction – Oil dealing company – Exclusivity agreement with retailers – Premises leased from retailer and sublet to him – Whether premium for lease paid on capital or revenue account – Income Tax Act 1952 (15 and 16 Geo. 6 and 1 Eliz. 2, c. 10), s. 137(f).

Citations:

[1965] UKHL TC – 43 – 1, [1965] 3 All ER 174, [1966] AC 295, [1965] 3 WLR 636, 43 TC 1

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income Tax Act 1952 137

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Inland Revenue Commissioners v John Lewis Properties Ltd CA 20-Dec-2002
The taxpayer company purchased properties to be occupied by other companies within the same group. Having granted leases, they assigned the rental income for the first six years to a bank in return for a capital payment. They then sought relief from . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax

Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.559796

Patmore v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 14 Jul 2010

FTTTx DIRECT TAX – Husband and wife jointly fund share purchase – over 97% shares purchased transferred to husband- new class of shares allotted to wife – wife receives approximately 40% of dividends – whether settlement under s660A ICTA 88.

Citations:

[2010] UKFTT 334 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 660A

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.422331