Search results

ok interesting, thanks

sort of yes / no. whilst the accounts showed it as a passive asset (or indeed could have been furniture or whatever), it was clearly always intended to be an active asset. Presumably the accounts were fashioned retrospectively to try to achieve the desired tax outcome, however even the accounts...

ok sorry to labour this but... the AAT/ATO said that despite the taxpayer having the land shown as a fixed asset, it was in fact WIP? this would make sense.

I'll read the judgment......

huh? they say the land is a business activity but isn't part of trading stock? Isn't it WIP? If it isn't WIP and it's not a fixed asset where the heck does it sit on the balance sheet?