In Ms L Stones v HMRC (TC01806 – 27 February) a self-employed radio presenter (S) claimed deductions for expenditure on clothing cosmetics hairdressing and subsistence expenses. HMRC issued amendments to her returns for 2006/07 to 2008/09 disallowing the deductions. S appealed contending that when she began self-employment in 2001 she had been informed by a HMRC officer (C) that she could claim a deduction where she spent money for the specific purpose of making public appearances and that she could claim subsistence expenses if she was working at least five miles away from her normal place of work. The First-tier Tribunal accepted S’s evidence holding that as a matter of law the expenditure was not deductible applying the principles laid down in Mallalieu v Drummond [1983] STC 665 and Caillebotte v Quinn [1975] STC...
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:
In Ms L Stones v HMRC (TC01806 – 27 February) a self-employed radio presenter (S) claimed deductions for expenditure on clothing cosmetics hairdressing and subsistence expenses. HMRC issued amendments to her returns for 2006/07 to 2008/09 disallowing the deductions. S appealed contending that when she began self-employment in 2001 she had been informed by a HMRC officer (C) that she could claim a deduction where she spent money for the specific purpose of making public appearances and that she could claim subsistence expenses if she was working at least five miles away from her normal place of work. The First-tier Tribunal accepted S’s evidence holding that as a matter of law the expenditure was not deductible applying the principles laid down in Mallalieu v Drummond [1983] STC 665 and Caillebotte v Quinn [1975] STC...
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:
