Wilcock v Pinto & Company
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
| Judgment Date | 20 February 1925 |
| Date | 20 February 1925 |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
6 cases
-
ANGLO PERSIAN OIL CO., LTD. v. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX
...Taxes [24 Times L. R. 32 ; (1908) A.C.46. ]; Greenwood v. Smith [5 38 Times L. R. 421; (1922) 1 A. C. 417. ]; and Wilcock v. Pinto [ 6 (1925) 1 K. B. 30.]. The decision in Crookston v. Furtado [ 7 (1911)8cot.C.217;5TaxCase"602.] may probably be supported for the second reason given by the C......
-
W.H. Muller and Company (London)Ltd v Lethem (HM Inspector of Taxes)
...terms double foreigner business, may be either the handling of the goods or the payment of the price in this country. InWilcock v. Pinto & Co.(1) ([1925] 1 K.B. 30) the Court of Appeal held that a firm was exercising a trade in England, where the contracts were made and the price was payabl......
-
Muller & Company (London) v Lethem ; Muller & Company (London) v Commissioners of Inland Revenue
...terms double foreigner business, may be either the handling of the goods or the payment of the price in this country. InWilcock v. Pinto & Co.(1) ([1925] 1 K.B. 30) the Court of Appeal held that a firm was exercising a trade in England, where the contracts were made and the price was payabl......
-
Maclaine & Company v Eccott
...F11911 S. C. 217; 5 Tax Cas. 602. F2(1881) 8 Q. B. D. 414. F3[1896] A. C. 325. F41911 S. C. 217; 5 Tax Cas. 602. F5[1924] 1 K. B. 304; [1925] 1 K. B. 30. F6(1912) 6 Tax Cas. F7[1921] 3 K. B. 583, 590, 591, 595; [1922] 1 A. C. 417. F8July 10, 1925. Tax Leaflets, 1925, No. 194. F9(1860) 5 H. ......
Get Started for Free
