Is this pedantic and is there any point?

Taken on a client recently from another firm. It's only a small concern in any case.

However, the previous adviser appears to have claimed AIA on items introduced (per their schedule provided) on 06/04/2005... the majority of which are labelled "building works" (for a garage used to store Stock I believe).

Obviously this isn't correct. The client says the works and assets noted were indeed bought some time ago.

No tax is at stake as a loss was made (and not relieved). Just seems a bit silly and gives me discomfort over the other figures/affairs.

Should I bother making an issue of it?

 

 

Comments
There is 1 comment. Login or register to view it.

I'm not sure of the generally accepted practice for this, but...

mackthefork |