27 February 2017
UT Decision: GDF Suez Teesside Limited (Formerly Teesside Power Limited) v HMRC
CORPORATION TAX — avoidance scheme — transfer of contingent,unrecognised, claim against third party to subsidiary in exchange for shares — subsidiary recognising value of asset despite contingency but parent not recognising shares — whether accounting GAAP-compliant — yes — loan relationship rules — whether FA 1996 s 84(1) engaged — yes — recognised value of asset to be brought into account as credit in parent’s corporation tax computation —appeal dismissed.
PROCEDURE — opening of enquiry — whether error in identification of accounting period invalidates enquiry — no, if intention clear.
David Milne QC & Elizabeth Wilson, instructed by the General Counsel and Solicitor to HM Revenue and Customs, for the Respondents.
To see the approved Decision, click here.
This content is provided free of charge for information purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on as such. No responsibility for the accuracy and/or correctness of the information and commentary set out in the article, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed or accepted by any member of PCTC or by PCTC as a whole.
