Aspden (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Baxi
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 20 February 1979 |
| Date | 20 February 1979 |
| Court | Chancery Division |
HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (CHANCERY DIVISION)-
Income tax - Child allowance - Taxpayer brother maintaining at own expense adult sister receiving full-time education - Whether in his custody - Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970, s 10(1)(b).
In the relevant year of assessment the taxpayer's sister was over 18 years of age and was receiving full-time instruction at an establishment within s 10(2)(b), Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970. The taxpayer maintained her at his own expense and exercised general control over her in various respects and was regarded by her as being in loco parentis. He claimed a child allowance under s 10(1)(b), Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970, in respect of her and the General Commissioners allowed his appeal against the Inspector's refusal of the claim.
The Chancery Division allowing the Inspector's appeal, held that the taxpayer's sister was an adult and therefore not in his custody.
Nwagbo v. Rising 51 TC 254 followed.
Stated for the opinion of the High Court of Justice under the Taxes Management Act 1970, s 56, by the Commissioners for the General Purposes of the Income Tax for the Division of Stratford in the County of Greater London.
(1) At a meeting of the Commissioners for the General Purposes of the Income Tax for the Division of Stratford in Greater London held at the Education Offices, London Borough of Newham, Stratford Broadway, London E. 15, on 28 April 1977 Mr. R.S. Baxi (hereinafter called "the taxpayer") appealed against a refusal by H.M. Inspector of Taxes (hereinafter called "the Appellant") to allow a deduction from his total income for the year 1975-76 by way of child allowance in respect of his sister Charankaur Baxi under s 10(1)(b) of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970.
(2) The question for our determination was whether the taxpayer was entitled to the said deduction by way of child allowance.
(3) The Appellant and taxpayer both addressed us and gave evidence but they called no other witnesses.
(4) The following facts were admitted or proved before us:-
-
(a) Charankaur Baxi was born on 15 August 1955 and is the sister of the taxpayer.
-
(b) The taxpayer's father died on 22 June 1973 and the family who had then been living in India emigrated to England on 27 October 1974. From that time onwards the taxpayer had undertaken the role of a father to the family which consisted of his mother, a brother and two sisters and he fully supported them.
-
(c) During the relevant year of assessment under appeal Charankaur Baxi received full-time instruction at Western College, an educational establishment, and met the conditions referred to in s 10(2)(b)of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970.
-
(d) The taxpayer exercised general control over his sister in that he provided for her upkeep and expenses, gave her pocket money, would give or withhold permission if she wished to go out of the house, would chaperone her if she wished to go out on her own, would be consulted on all family matters and was regarded by her as being in loco parentis.
-
(e) The taxpayer maintained his sister at his own expense.
(5) The taxpayer contended that:-
-
(a) for the year in question he had the custody of and maintained at his own expense a child who was his sister and who was receiving full-time instruction at an educational establishment;
-
(b) the word "child"...
To continue reading
Request your trial