BROMILOW & EDWARDS LTD. Vs. INLAND REVENUE COMMISSIONERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I do not propose to detail the circumstances of this case, which are published in the report of the case below before Megarry J. [1969] 1 W. L. R. 1081.

(2.) THE first point that the taxpayers take is that since it is impossible in law, if a dividend is paid after April 5, 1966, for a company to avoid or reduce a liability under section 47(3) in respect of that dividend, then the company cannot, when it accelerated the final dividend of Pound 170,000 by a declaration shortly before April 5, 1966, by the board of a second interim dividend of that amount, have had the purpose of achieving that impossibility.

(3.) FOR my part, I really cannot accept that argument for a moment. It is quite a common occurrence that the intention of an enactment can be expressed with sufficient clarity in more than one way. The directors here paid a dividend involving an excess of Pounds 140,000 over the standard amount, and they paid this dividend that was due in the ordinary course of events to be paid in the year 1966 -67 because, had it been paid in the year 1966 -67, it would have attracted liability under section 47(3). It seems to me, with great respect to the argument, that on the plain language of the section, their purpose in paying was to avoid or reduce a liability under section 47(3) in respect dividends paid in the year 1966 -67.