Market leading insight for tax experts
View online issue

Mrs P Azam v HMRC

In Mrs P Azam v HMRC (TC00895 – 17 January) the proprietor of a beauty salon claimed a deduction for counselling expenses. HMRC rejected the claim and she appealed contending that she had undertaken the counselling in order to help her deal with ‘issues such as those where she needed to confront her staff’. The First-Tier Tribunal dismissed her appeal finding that she had incurred the expenditure with a dual purpose part of which ‘was to enhance her own wellbeing’. Accordingly the expenditure was not exclusively for the purposes of her business.

Why it matters: ITTOIA 2005 s 34 provides that expenditure is only deductible if it is wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business. The First-Tier Tribunal upheld HMRC’s view that the payment here had been partly incurred for personal purposes and was not an allowable deduction.

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:

Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this article in full.
Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.
EDITOR'S PICKstar
Top