Case Law

Moveable partitioning used to adjust office floor space was held to be plant. Jarrold (HM Inspector of Taxes) v John Good & Sons Limited 1962 40 TC 681

A swimming pool was held to be plant in Cooke v Beach Caravans Ltd 1974 STC 402.

In Dixon v Fitches Garage 1975 STC 480 a canopy constructed over pumps of a petrol station was not plant. However, in O’Culachain v McMullan Bros 1995 V ITR 200 it was held that the canopy provided an attractive setting for the sale of the taxpayer’s product and constituted plant.

A boat wreck used as a floating restaurant was regarded as the structure in which the business was carried on rather than an apparatus used in the trade. Benson v Yard Arm Club 1979 STC 266

Electric light fittings, decor and murals in a hotel were plant as they were used to create an atmosphere. IRC v Scottish and Newcastle Breweries Limited 1982 STC 296

An inflatable cover for a tennis court was not plant in Thomas v Reynolds 1988 STC 135

A demountable suspended ceiling was not plant but was part of the premises. Dunnes Stores (Oakville) Ltd v McCronin (Inspector of Taxes) 1988 IV ITR 68

In Gray v Seymour Garden Centre 1995 STC 706, a specialised glasshouse was categorised as a ‘purpose built structure’ and did not qualify as plant.

A car wash facility was held to be merely a building which housed machinery in Attwood (HMIT) v Anduff Car Wash Ltd 1997 STC 1167.

An all weather racetrack functioned as part of the premises or setting of the company’s business and therefore did not qualify as plant. Shove (Inspector of Taxes) v Lingfield Park 1991 Ltd 2004 STC 805