23 Jul 2010
SAHA V COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE SC 24/2009
- Citation
- SAHA V COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE SC 24/2009
- Court
- Supreme Court
The forfeiture was a purchase price adjustment producing a notional loss under s CG18, but s CG23(5) did not apply because the disposal was not for no or inadequate consideration; however the Deed of Settlement resulted in a gain in kind by allowing retention of shares that would otherwise have been forfeited, and s CG14(2) deems that gain to be equal to the market value which, when included in the s CG18 calculation, offsets the claimed deduction to nil, so the deduction fails.