[169U Eligibility conditions for deferred [business asset disposal relief]]
Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 (1992 c 12) | Legislation

[169U  Eligibility conditions for deferred [business asset disposal relief]]

[(1)     Section 169V applies if, ignoring the operation of section 169V(2)(b), each of the following conditions is met.

(2)     The first condition is that a chargeable gain (“the first eventual gain”) accrues as a result of the operation of—

paragraph 4 of Schedule 5B (enterprise investment scheme), or

paragraph 5 of Schedule 8B (investments in social enterprises).

(3)     If the first condition is met, the paragraph and Schedule mentioned in subsection (2) that apply in the case are referred to in this section, and section 169V, as “the relevant paragraph” and “the applicable Schedule”.

(4)     The second condition is—

(a)

Powered by Lexis+®
 

Popular documents

LEXISNEXIS

Third party rights—the common law doctrine of privity of contract

Third party rights—the common law doctrine of privity of contractThis Practice Note discusses the common law doctrine of privity of contract; the equitable and statutory exceptions to it; how the doctrine affects enforcing a contract against a third party and what happens when, notwithstanding the

LEXISNEXIS

Serving outside the jurisdiction with court permission—application and order

This Practice Note addresses issues when serving out of the jurisdiction and the permission of the court is required. It explains how to make an application and the form of order required. An application to serve out of the jurisdiction is generally made without notice and on the papers. Key

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

Introduction to passing off

Unlike many other countries, the UK has no unfair competition law. Brand owners seeking to prevent competitors from marketing ‘copycat’ products or using misleading advertising have to rely on a combination of different intellectual property rights. These rights include the common law right to