Skip to content
Solved
SearchBrowse
Sign in

Contents

Official guidance
Trusts, Settlements and Estates Manual

TSEM7000 · Tax Cases: Table of Contents

  • TSEM7005 · Tax Cases: Carver v Duncan STC 356
  • TSEM7010 · Tax Cases: CIR v Hamilton of Dalzell (Lord) 10 TC 406
  • TSEM7015 · Tax Cases: CIR v Dewar 16 TC 84
  • TSEM7020 · Tax Cases: CIR v Plummer 54 TC 1
  • TSEM7023 · Tax Cases: Cunard's Trustees v CIR 27 TC 122
  • TSEM7025 · Tax Cases: Dale v CIR 34 TC 468
  • TSEM7030 · Tax Cases: Fry v Shiels' Trustees 6 TC 583
  • TSEM7032 · Tax Cases: HMRC v Peter Clay STC 469
  • TSEM7035 · Tax Cases: MacFarlane v CIR 14 TC 532
  • TSEM7040 · Tax Cases: McDougal v Smith 7 TC 134
  • TSEM7045 · Tax Cases: Miller (Lady) v CIR 15 TC 25
  • TSEM7050 · Tax Cases: Murray (Elizabeth) v CIR 11 TC 133
  • TSEM7055 · Tax Cases: Reid's Trustees v CIR 14 TC 512
  • TSEM7062 · Tax Cases: Stevenson v Wishart & others 59 TC 740
  • TSEM7065 · Tax Cases: Tollemache (Lord) v CIR 11 TC 277
  • TSEM7070 · Tax Cases: Williams v Singer & others 7 TC 387
  1. Tax Cases: Table of Contents
  2. Tax Cases: CIR v Plummer 54 TC 1

TSEM7020 | Tax Cases: CIR v Plummer 54 TC 1

From HM Revenue & Customs · Trusts, Settlements and Estates Manual

Summary

In a tax avoidance scheme an individual received a lump sum and in exchange made covenanted payments. He claimed a deduction for the payments in computing his total income.

Decision

The covenanted payments were income payments and the Settlements legislation did not apply to the arrangement. This is because the individual had received full consideration and there was no element of bounty.

TSEM references

TSEM4105

PreviousNext
PrivacyTerms