153 Election to defer capital allowances
Finance Act 2006 (2006 c 25) | Legislation

153  Election to defer capital allowances

(1)     This section applies if—

(a)     a company carries on a ring fence trade in an accounting period beginning on or after 1st January 2006,

(b)     relevant expenditure is incurred for the purposes of or in relation to the ring fence trade (see subsections (4) to (7)), and

(c)     the relevant expenditure would (but for this section) be treated as incurred for the purposes of CAA 2001 in the period of 12 months ending with 31st December 2005.

(2)     The company may elect for the relevant expenditure to be treated instead as if it were incurred on the first day of the company's first accounting period beginning on or after 1st January 2006.

(3)     The election—

(a)     has effect for the purposes of CAA 2001 other than those of section 45G (expenditure not first-year qualifying expenditure under section 45F if plant or machinery used for less than 5 years in a ring

Powered by Lexis+®
 

Popular documents

LEXISNEXIS

Proprietary estoppel

Proprietary estoppelThis Practice Note considers proprietary estoppel from a generic standpoint.For industry specific guidance on proprietary estoppel, see Practice Notes:•Estoppel and property law•Mortgages by estoppelProprietary estoppel—what is it?Unlike the other forms of estoppel (see Practice

LEXISNEXIS

Costs and the ‘without prejudice’ rule

Costs and the ‘without prejudice’ ruleCosts determination and the ‘without prejudice’ ruleAn issue for practitioners is whether correspondence marked ‘without prejudice’ can be used against a party when the court comes to determine the issue of costs. The Court of Appeal in Walker v Wilsher (1889)

LEXISNEXIS

Public inquiry procedure

Public inquiry procedureThe procedure by which a public inquiry is conducted will vary significantly from one inquiry to the next. Even for inquiries established under the Inquiries Act 2005 (IA 2005), the associated inquiry rules are not particularly prescriptive as to how they ought to be

LEXISNEXIS

No deal Brexit—jurisdiction (UK and the Lugano Convention) [Archived]

No deal Brexit—jurisdiction (UK and the Lugano Convention) [Archived]ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained.This Practice Note has been produced in partnership with Guy Pendell, Liz Williams and Kushal Gandhi of CMS.This Practice Note covers the situation where the UK