IRC v Montgomery [1975] 49 TC 679
Judgement for the case IRC v Montgomery
Table Of Contents
A building owned by the trustees was damaged by fire and they became entitled to recover insurance money.
The husband of one of the trustees paid them for an assignment of the trustees' rights under the policies. In due course the insurers paid the husband sums totalling £75,192.
As the law then stood rights under insurance policies were not “assets” for CGT purposes.
The Crown contended that the money was a “capital sum derived from assets”, i.e. the damaged property, and was therefore liable to CGT by virtue of what is now s22(1).
Walton J
From what asset of the trustees was the capital sum derived? From sale of the rights under policy not property.
s22 is confined to cases where no assets are acquired. (a) - (d) = examples where there was no acquisition of an asset.
RELATED CASES
For Further Study on IRC v Montgomery
Taxation Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambrid...
Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get StartedSimilar Cases
Related Product Samples
These product samples contain the same concepts we cover in this case.
| Tax Law | Capital Gains Tax Notes (17 pages) |
Taxation Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambrid...
Since 2010, Oxbridge Notes has been a trusted education marketplace, supplying high-quality materials from top achievers at universities like Oxford, Cambridge, LSE, Harvard, and Yale.