Search - craven

Craven v. White, [1988] BTC 268 (HL)-- summary under Subsection 248(10) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 248- Subsection 248(10) a series if no real likelihood that the successive transactions will not occur Lord Jauncey stated: "If it were appropriate to prepare a formula defining 'composite transaction' in the light of the passages in the speeches in Ramsay, Burmah and Dawson to which I have referred I should be tempted to suggest the following: 'A step in a linear transaction which has no business purpose apart from the avoidance or deferment of tax liability will be treated as forming part of a pre-ordained series of transactions or of a composite transaction if it was taken at a time when negotiations or arrangements for the carrying through as a continuous process of a subsequent transaction which actually takes place had reached a stage when there was no real likelihood that such subsequent transaction would not take place and if thereafter such negotiations or arrangements were carried through to completion without genuine interruption.'" Words and Phrases series of transactions ...

Craven v. White, [1988] BTC 268 (HL)-- summary under Tax Avoidance Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Tax Avoidance Lord Oliver stated: "As the law currently stands, the essentials emerging from Furniss v. ...

One property, the “Craven Road” property, was a basic bungalow with an unfinished basement. ... In determining whether there was substantial renovation of the Craven Road property and of the second property (the “Fourth Street” property) both parties accepted the use of the second of the three methods referred to in GST/HST Technical Information Bulletin B-092 for measuring whether a renovation had been “substantial” (with 90% appearing in B-092 as the minimum percentage for a property to be considered as having been “substantially renovated”). ...

In finding that there was a single composite transaction, so that the transaction was to be treated as if the Scottish Trusts had disposed of their AWG shares for £14.3M, Newy LJ stated (paras. 51-52, 56-57): If, as was the case in Craven v. ...