AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Austin Payment Not Taxable

14th March 1958, Page 66
14th March 1958
Page 66
Page 66, 14th March 1958 — Austin Payment Not Taxable
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

D EASONS were given by Mr. Justice

Vaisey. in the Chancery Division last week, for holding that a payment by the Austin Motor Co., Ltd., to Lookers, Ltd., main Austin distributors in the Manchester area, was not to be included in the assessment of profits for 1955-56. Mr. Justice Vaisey had dismissed an appeal by the Crown against a decision of the Special Commissioners for Income Tax.

He said that the sum in dispute0,519—was the first half of £7,038 paid by Austin as compensation after Lookers' annual agreement had been varied. Lookers' annual agreements with Austin were the foundation of their trade. The alterations were expected to weaken it, and the sum in question was paid to reinforce, stabilize or strengthen it. It was no part of the company's assessable profits, but was to be treated as a capital receipt. ;

BALLAST TRADE WAGE CHANGES PAA NEW schedule of minimum wage differentials has been put into operation by the National Joint Council for the Ballast and Sand Industry. On top of their hourly rate, drivers of service vans should receive an extra 3d.; drivers of dumpers and mechanical shovels, 3c1.; drivers of tractors fitted with bulldozer or scraper equipment, 3d.-6d., depending on their experience; and drivers of Euclid 15-ton rear dump vehicles, 3d.-6d., again depending on experience.


comments powered by Disqus