Cambridge University Press's failed claim in 1940 for exemption from UK Income Tax

Internal Inland Revenue further note on Solicitor's report of hearing, 29th January 1941

scan

Reference: T1085/8/40

Cambridge University Press.

In opening the appeal Mr. Cyril King stated that it had been agreed with the inspector that profits on work done for the University should be exempt. This remark was not understood, as it seems difficult to see how a Committee of the University can make profit out of work done for the University, and some discussion on these lines took place.

Although the course of paragraph (8) of the reference of 25th January 1940 does not of itself indicate that there had been such a definite agreement, there seemed no reason for not accepting Mr King's unequivocal statement, and the matter was not pressed. If of course there was in fact no such agreement as that to which Mr King referred I think there is nothing to prevent the matter being taken up with the Appellants.

[handwritten postscript] Evidently Mr King's statement was based on a misapprehension of what had been said previously and nothing was given away at the hearing. I think, if you agree, that it would be well to clear up the point with the accountants.

Last item in this series. Click for the first item in the next series, CUP's War Damage claim of 1941, or for the Wheedlers' War Index, or for the CUP & OUP 1975-78 Index.


CLICK TO GO/RETURN TO:

THE SURPRISING TRUTH ABOUT OUP'S 'CHARITABLE STATUS'

THE OXBRIDGE COLLEGE ACCOUNTS INDEX AND OUP ACCOUNTS INDEX

THE MALCOLM vs. OXFORD CASE INDEXES: I (1984-92) AND II (2001-02)

THE HISTORY OF AKME AND OF THIS WEBSITE

THE AKME OXFORD CUTTINGS LIBRARY

THE AKME LITERARY LAW LIBRARY

THE AKME STUDENT LAW LIBRARY

ABOUT MAKING NAMES

ABOUT THE REMEDY

THE SITE INDEX

e-mail: akme@btinternet.com