header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
20 September 2013
Issue: 7576 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

Corporation tax—Computation of profits—Deductions

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Interfish Ltd v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2013] UKUT 0336 (TCC), [2013] All ER (D) 22 (Sep)

Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber), Birss J, 16 Jul 2013

The “wholly and exclusively” test in s 74(1)(a) of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 (ICTA 1988) does not set up two categories of purpose—private and business—and provide that everything should be allocated to one or other category. The question is only whether the taxpayer’s actual purpose has been exclusively (namely solely) a business purpose. If not then the test is not satisfied.

Jonathan Peacock QC (instructed by Deloitte LLP) for the taxpayer. Patrick Way QC (instructed by the Revenue and Customs Commissioners) for the Revenue.

The taxpayer was a fishing, fish processing, fish wholesaling and fish retailing company based in Plymouth. Its retail business (within the stores of one of the major supermarkets retailers) traded as “South West Seafoods”. The taxpayer was controlled by C. It was common ground that C’s state of mind amounted to the state of mind

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Partner and Manchester office lead appointed head of family

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

DWF insurance services director appointed to Civil Justice Council

R3—Jodie Wildridge

R3—Jodie Wildridge

Kings Chambers barrister appointed chair of R3 Yorkshire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Renters’ Rights revolution begins—brace for tribunal chaos

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

NLJ this week: Civil procedure gets a spring overhaul
Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
NLJ this week: Why GP complaints are going nowhere
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
NLJ this week: Prenups meet a jurisdictional brick wall
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
NLJ this week: Has Rylands v Fletcher come back from the dead?
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll