swarb.co.uk - law index
These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases. Â
Taxes Management - From: 1930 To: 1959
This page lists 12 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.
Â
 WH Cockerline and Co v Inland Revenue Commissioners; 1930 - (1930) 16 TC 1
Â
Lynn v Nathanson [1931] 2 DLR 457
1931
Commonwealth, Taxes Management, Landlord and Tenant
(Nova Scotia Court of Appeal) A government theatre tax had to be paid by patrons who bought two tickets, one for the theatre and one for the tax. The tax was held to be outside the phrase in the lease which recovered rent on "gross receipts obtained in the theatre " which phrase was to be construed in context.
1 Citers
Â
Riach v Lord Advocate (1931) 18 TC 18
1931
SCS
Lord President Clyde, Lord Blackburn
Scotland, Taxes Management
The court considered the issue of a reward to a revenue informer: "the value of the result of the information . . may prove to be nothing for reasons of which the informer may be totally unaware, eg, that the Inland Revenue authorities may already be in possession of much of the information which the informer believes to be confined to himself."
Inland Revenue Regulation Act 1890 34
1 Citers
Â
 Inland Revenue Commissioners v Duke of Westminster; HL 7-May-1935 - [1936] AC 1; [1935] All ER 259; (1935) 19 Tax Cas 490; (1935) 104 LJKB 383; [1935] UKHL TC_19_490; [1935] UKHL 4
Â
Trautwein v Federal Commissioner of Taxation [1936] 56 CLR 63; [1936] HCA 77
9 Sep 1936
Latham CJ, Starke, Dixon and Evatt JJ.
Taxes Management
(High Court of Australia) Latham CJ considered how the Inland Revenue might make an assessment of a taxpayer's income and said: "In the absence of some record in the mind or in the books of the taxpayer, it would often be quite impossible to make a correct assessment. The assessment would necessarily be a guess to some extent and almost certainly inaccurate in fact. There is every reason to assume that the legislature did not intend to confer upon a potential taxpayer the valuable privilege of disqualifying himself in that capacity by the simple and relatively unskilled method of losing either his memory or his books.
The application of section 39 is not, in my opinion, excluded as soon as it is shown that an element in the assessment is a guess and that it is therefore very probably wrong. It is prima facie right - and remains right until the appellant shows that it is wrong. If it were necessary to decide the point I would, as at present advised, be prepared to hold that the taxpayer must 'at least as a general rule' go further and show not only negatively that the assessment is wrong, but also positively what correction should be made in order to make it right or more nearly right. I say 'as a general rule' because, conceivably, there might be a case where it appeared that the assessment had been made upon no intelligible basis even as an approximation, and the court would then set aside the assessment and remit it to the commissioner for further consideration."
1 Citers
[ Austlii ]
Â
Regina v Barker [1941] 2 KB 381; [1941] 3 All ER 33
1941
CCA
Tucker J
Crime, Taxes Management
In the course of investigating the defendant for tax faud, he was interviewed by the Inland Revenue. Relying upon a standard statement by the revenue, the appellant produced two ledgers which had been fraudulently prepared in order to induce the Revenue to believe that the irregularities amounted to only £7,000. Held: The statement by the Revenue, which reflected a statement in Parliament, was partly a promise or an inducement and that it was not admissible on a charge of conspiring to cheat the Revenue by producing false statements of account. It was held, that "those documents stand on precisely the same footing as an oral or written confession which is brought into existence as the result of such a promise, inducement or threat."
1 Citers
Â
Absolom v Talbot [1943] 1 All ER 589
1943
Scott LJ
Taxes Management
Scott LJ said: "No judicial countenance can or ought to be given in matters of taxation to any system of extra-legal concessions."
1 Citers
Â
Carrimore Six Wheelers Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners (1944) 26 TC 301
1944
Taxes Management
1 Citers
Â
Tootal Broadhurst Lee Co Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners [1949] 1 All ER 261
1949
HL
Lord Norman
Taxes Management
Fees received for the use of the taxpayer's productive plant were not income from investment.
Lord Norman defined the meaning of 'investment', saying: "The meaning of 'investment' is its meaning, not in the vernacular of the man in the street, but in the vernacular of the business man. It is a form of income-yielding property which the businessman, looking at the total assets of the company, would single out as an investment. It certainly does not include all the property of the company and I am unable to accede to the proposition . . that every item of the company’s property is an investment, and that while the company uses those items itself the profit derives from them is a profit of trade, but, if it hands one of them over to others to use in return for a periodic payment, it begins to receive an income from an investment. The business man would not limit income from investments to income from the kinds of securities which are quoted on the stock exchange, and he would, I think, regard as income from investment a profitable rent from a sub-lease of office premises or the like surplus to the company’s requirements."
1 Citers
Â
Peter Buchanan Limited and Macharg v McVey [1955] AC 516; [1954] IR 89
1954
Kingsmill Moore J
International, Taxes Management
(Supreme Court of Ireland) The plaintiff was a company registered in Scotland put into compulsory liquidation by the revenue under a substantial claim for excess profits tax and income tax. The liquidator was really a nominee of the revenue. The defendant director had realised all the company's assets and having paid all the debts save the revenue, had the balance transferred to himself to his credit with an Irish bank. He moved to Ireland. The action appeared to seek to recover the balance from the defendant at the instance of the company directed by the liquidator. Held: The director's actions were dishonestly intended to defeat the claim of the revenue in Scotland as a creditor. However though the action was in form an action by the company to recover these assets, it was found "For the purpose of this case it is sufficient to say that when it appears to the court that the whole object of the suit is to collect tax for a foreign revenue, and that this will be the sole result of a decision in favour of the plaintiff, then a court is entitled to reject the claim by refusing jurisdiction" and as an attempt to enforce indirectly a claim to tax by the revenue authorities of another State, the action was dismissed.
1 Citers
Â
 Government of India v Taylor; HL 1955 - [1955] AC 491; [1955] 1 All ER 292; (1955) 27 ITR 356
Â
 Edwards (Inspector of Taxes) v Bairstow; HL 25-Jul-1955 - [1956] AC 14; [1955] 3 All ER 48; [1955] 36 Tax Cas 207; [1955] UKHL 3; [1955] UKHL TC_36_207; 36 TC 207
Â