Patrick Cannon (15 Old Square Chambers) provides guidance on the recent decision made by the Court of Appeal in Project Blue, and asks why the MoD did not make it a condition of sale that SDLT was paid.
In his judgment in Project Blue Ltd v HMRC [2016] EWCA Civ 485 (reported in Tax Journal 3 June 2016) Patten LJ (with whom Lewison and Underhill LJJ agreed) shed some light on the operation of the SDLT sub-sale rules (as they were in 2008) the exemptions for Sharia funding in FA 2003 s 71A and the statutory general anti-avoidance rule for SDLT in FA 2003 s 75A in the context of a SDLT scheme that was deployed to avoid the payment of tax on the acquisition of Chelsea Barracks in 2008.
The issue at stake and the facts were...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
Patrick Cannon (15 Old Square Chambers) provides guidance on the recent decision made by the Court of Appeal in Project Blue, and asks why the MoD did not make it a condition of sale that SDLT was paid.
In his judgment in Project Blue Ltd v HMRC [2016] EWCA Civ 485 (reported in Tax Journal 3 June 2016) Patten LJ (with whom Lewison and Underhill LJJ agreed) shed some light on the operation of the SDLT sub-sale rules (as they were in 2008) the exemptions for Sharia funding in FA 2003 s 71A and the statutory general anti-avoidance rule for SDLT in FA 2003 s 75A in the context of a SDLT scheme that was deployed to avoid the payment of tax on the acquisition of Chelsea Barracks in 2008.
The issue at stake and the facts were...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
fbf3367d-db6c-4ff2-8db3-85bcec6d2354.jpg?sfvrsn=3e30a8aa_1)
