Market leading insight for tax experts
View online issue

Urenco: plant and machinery allowances

Speed read
In Urenco, the Upper Tribunal held that the First-Tier Tribunal made certain errors in law in deciding to deny the taxpayer plant and machinery capital allowances. The decision is another recent example of the courts being asked to consider the common meanings of words used in the CAA 2001. The UT’s conclusion that the term ‘building’ has a number of ordinary meanings, and each of these should have been considered in the context of the legislation, has given the courts some flexibility in applying the legislation to increasingly innovative assets. The flurry of recent cases in the area may be partly explained by the seven-year gap between the removal of IBAs and introduction of SBAs, which has put increased pressure on the application of the legislation relating to plant and machinery capital allowances to large power generation projects.

If you or your firm subscribes to, please click the login box below:

If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:

Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this article in full.
Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or '' for further assistance.