28 Nov 2014
COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE v JOHN CURTIS DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED [2014] NZHC 3034
- Citation
- [2014] NZHC 3034
- Court
- High Court
The agreement contains two separate, identifiable supplies: (a) capital sale of land and existing tenanted buildings at settlement; and (b) separate supply of letting and construction services under the development option performed after title passed to AMP. Development payments were consideration for services supplied to a third party and are income and taxable. Shortfall penalties were not imposed because the taxpayer's position was rationally arguable and the Authority had accepted it.