In P Marshall v HMRC (TC02466 – 24 January) a company provided one of its directors with a car. He appealed against a charge to car benefit contending that he had repaid the cost of using the car as required by ITEPA 2003 s 144(1). The First-tier Tribunal accepted his contention and allowed his appeal. Judge Geraint Jones specifically rejected HMRC’s contention that s 144 required that the sum that the employee was required to pay for any tax year in question must be paid within that tax year. He observed that the words ‘the tax year in question’ only appeared in s 144(1)(a) and did not also appear in s 144(1)(b) so that a relevant payment was deductible even if it was made after the end of the tax year in question.
In P Marshall v HMRC (TC02466 – 24 January) a company provided one of its directors with a car. He appealed against a charge to car benefit contending that he had repaid the cost of using the car as required by ITEPA 2003 s 144(1). The First-tier Tribunal accepted his contention and allowed his appeal. Judge Geraint Jones specifically rejected HMRC’s contention that s 144 required that the sum that the employee was required to pay for any tax year in question must be paid within that tax year. He observed that the words ‘the tax year in question’ only appeared in s 144(1)(a) and did not also appear in s 144(1)(b) so that a relevant payment was deductible even if it was made after the end of the tax year in question.
