Seymour v Reed
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 24 May 1927 |
| Year | 1927 |
| Date | 24 May 1927 |
| Court | House of Lords |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
49 cases
-
Wright v Boyce (Inspector of Taxes)
...on his part? and what we have got to look to see is whether the sum in question does so come to the holder of this office." 17 Then, in Reed v. Seymour, reported in 11 Tax Cases at page 625, Lord Cave made some observations which are often quoted and it will be necessary, I think, for me to......
- Moorhouse (Inspector of Taxes) v Dooland
-
Clayton v Gothorp
...I was referred by Mr. Medd to certain authorities in which the relevant principles are laid down. The first was Reed v.Seymour(1) 11 T.C. 625. The headnote to that case is as follows: The Committee of a Cricket Club in the exercise of their absolute discretion granted a benefit match to a p......
-
Corbett v Duff (HM Inspector of Taxes)
...and were not mere personal testimonials. Cooper v. Blakiston, 5 T.C. 347, and Davis v. Harrison,11 T.C. 707, followed; Reed v. Seymour, 11 T.C. 625, CASES (1) Corbett v. Duff (H.M. Inspector of Taxes) CASE Stated under Section 149 of the Income Tax Act, 1918, by the Commissioners for the Ge......
Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
-
TAXATION OF EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS
...benefits ‘of any kind whatever…received or enjoyed…in respect of, in the course of, or by virtue of an office or employment.’ 21. [1927] A.C. 554. At p. 559, Viscount Cave L.C. suggested that to determine whether a benefit is taxable, the following question must be asked: “Is it in the end ......