Tax Appeals Commission determination 78TACD2022 regarding Capital Gains Tax, 2022

Administrative Decision Number78TACD2022
Date16 May 2022
RespondentThe Revenue Commissioners
1
78TACD2022
Between
Appellant
and
The Revenue Commissioners
Respondent
Determination
Introduction
1. This is an appeal to the Tax Appeals Commission (“the Commission”) pursuant to and in
accordance with the provisions of section 949I of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 (“the
TCA 1997”) by (“the Appellant”)
against a Notice of Assessment to Capital Gains Tax (“CGT”) raised by the Revenue
Commissioners (“the Respondent”) in respect of in the
sum of 105,743.
2. On 6 June 2006, pursuant to a Court Order made on under the Family Law
(Divorce) Act 1996 (“the 1996 Act”), the deceased disposed of a property to an unrelated
third party for the sum of . The Appellant maintains that the Court Order was a
Property Adjustment Order and consequently, there is no liability to CGT by reason of the
provisions of section 1031(2) of the TCA 1997.
3. On 1 September 2014, the Appellant duly appealed to the Commission. The appeal
proceeded by way of a hearing on 06 May 2022.
2
Background
4. On 27 April 2006, the Circuit Court, granted a between
the pursuant to section 5(1) of the 1996 Act and various
ancillary Orders (“the Order”). The Court granted inter alia the following ancillary Orders:-
1. An Order that the property known as be sold.
2. An Order that the Respondent pay to the Applicant the sum €700,000.00
regardless of the price received for the above property, with the balance of
the proceeds of sale (net of costs of sale and tax liabilities) to be paid to the
respondent…….
5. An order that the parties Solicitors hereto have joint carriage of sale….
11. An order that each party be responsible for their own tax:….
5. On 6 June 2006, pursuant to Order 1 of the aforementioned Order, the deceased entered
into a contract for the sale of (“the property”) with an unrelated third party, in the
amount of . The deceased’s Solicitor sought a CG50 Certificate pursuant to
section 980(8) of the TCA 1997 and the deceased was listed on the certificate as the sole
vendor of the property.
6. On 2 August 2013, the Respondent raised an assessment to CGT in respect of the sale
of the property, in the sum of €138,372. Following further representations, this amount
was reduced and the CGT currently at issue is €105,743. The deceased did not file a
return, as she maintained the effect of the Order was to transfer the beneficial interest in
the property to the deceased’s former spouse, who was responsible for the return and
payment of any CGT liability.
7. The Appellant maintains that the deceased’s estate has no liability to CGT by reason of
section 1031(2) of the TCA 1997 and the consequence of the Order, was to divest the
deceased’s beneficial interest in the property, in her former spouse.
8. The Respondent maintains that the provisions of section 1031 of the TCA 1997 are clear
and unambiguous and do not apply to the present circumstances. This is because the
section requires an asset to be disposed of by one spouse to another spouse, which has
not occurred. The deceased disposed of the property to an unrelated third party and not
her former spouse. The Respondent maintains that the terms of the Order do not transfer
the beneficial interest in the property, to the deceased’s former spouse.
9. It is important to note that prior to the hearing of the substantive appeal, the Appellant
argued that the Respondent was not permitted to raise the assessment, due to the

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT