In P Moore v HMRC (TC02827 – 22 August) a financial adviser (M) purchased a two-bedroomed house (110H) in 2002. He let it to tenants until November 2006 when he moved into it after separating from his wife. However he arranged for correspondence to be sent to the house of his new partner (J) with whom he purchased another house in July 2007 (and whom he subsequently married after divorcing his first wife). In August 2007 M sold 110H. HMRC issued an amendment to his self-assessment charging CGT on the gain. M appealed contending that he had occupied 110H as his principal private residence. The First-tier Tribunal rejected this contention and dismissed his appeal. Judge Walters found that M’s occupation of the house ‘did not have any degree of permanence or expectation of continuity’ and that...
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 P Moore v HMRC (TC02827 – 22 August) a financial adviser (M) purchased a two-bedroomed house (110H) in 2002. He let it to tenants until November 2006 when he moved into it after separating from his wife. However he arranged for correspondence to be sent to the house of his new partner (J) with whom he purchased another house in July 2007 (and whom he subsequently married after divorcing his first wife). In August 2007 M sold 110H. HMRC issued an amendment to his self-assessment charging CGT on the gain. M appealed contending that he had occupied 110H as his principal private residence. The First-tier Tribunal rejected this contention and dismissed his appeal. Judge Walters found that M’s occupation of the house ‘did not have any degree of permanence or expectation of continuity’ and that...
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:
.jpg?sfvrsn=335a554c_0 "300 x 250 (MPU)")