Share this content

Is this pedantic and is there any point?

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?


Please login or register to join the discussion.

19th Aug 2012 00:26

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

It looks like the return will be closed for this year, and no deliberate deception has taken place, can you even do anything about it if you decided you wanted to?

Also why was the loss not relieved? Did they never make taxable profits from that trade, or did the trade cease? Just interested.



Thanks (0)
Share this content