In Scottish Widows plc v HMRC (and cross-appeal) (Supreme Court – 6 July) a large life insurance company (S) claimed that it had made Case I losses of more than £1 000 000 000 following its demutualisation.
HMRC began an enquiry into S’s returns and ascertained that amounts which S had described as ‘transfers from capital reserve’ had not been taken into account in the computation.
The case was referred to the Special Commissioners under FA 1998 Sch 18 para 31A.
The Commissioners upheld HMRC’s contention that the effect of FA 1989 s 83 was that the ‘transfers from capital reserve’ had to be taken into account as receipts in computing the loss.
Both sides appealed to the Supreme Court which unanimously dismissed S’s appeal and allowed HMRC’s cross-appeal holding that the amounts to be brought into account...
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 Scottish Widows plc v HMRC (and cross-appeal) (Supreme Court – 6 July) a large life insurance company (S) claimed that it had made Case I losses of more than £1 000 000 000 following its demutualisation.
HMRC began an enquiry into S’s returns and ascertained that amounts which S had described as ‘transfers from capital reserve’ had not been taken into account in the computation.
The case was referred to the Special Commissioners under FA 1998 Sch 18 para 31A.
The Commissioners upheld HMRC’s contention that the effect of FA 1989 s 83 was that the ‘transfers from capital reserve’ had to be taken into account as receipts in computing the loss.
Both sides appealed to the Supreme Court which unanimously dismissed S’s appeal and allowed HMRC’s cross-appeal holding that the amounts to be brought into account...
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:
