Iswera v Commissioner of Tax, Trinidad and Tobago [1965] 1 W...

Facts

• The appellant, Iswera, purchased a large plot of land in Trinidad and Tobago.
• She subdivided the land into smaller lots and sold them over time, generating significant profit.
• The Commissioner of Tax argued that these profits were taxable income under the Income Tax Ordinance.
• Iswera contended that her profit constituted a capital gain, asserting it was not derived from regular business activity.
• There was a dispute about whether the process of subdivision and subsequent sale was simply the realization of a capital asset or amounted to trading as a business.

Issues

1. Whether the profit from the subdivision and sale of land constituted taxable income or a capital gain.
2. Whether Iswera's main purpose in acquiring the property was for trading (business) or as a long-term investment.
3. Which factors should be considered when determining the nature of the gain from property transactions.

Decision

• The Privy Council determined that Iswera’s main purpose for acquiring the land was not to conduct a land development business, but to benefit from its appreciation.
• It was held that planning to sell for profit does not automatically make a gain taxable as income.
• The single transaction and the handling of the asset indicated the profit was a capital gain rather than the proceeds of a trading activity.
• Thus, the profit realized from selling the subdivided lots was not subject to income tax.

Legal Principles

• The main purpose for acquiring an asset is important in determining tax liability on profit from its sale.
• Profits do not become taxable income simply because the owner intended to sell at a profit; the distinction between investment (capital) and trading (business) must be assessed on all facts.
• Relevant factors include nature of the asset, length of ownership, frequency of similar transactions, and the method of acquisition and sale.
• Courts favor a thorough factual analysis over rigid application of profit motive tests.

Conclusion

The Privy Council’s decision in Iswera v CTT clarified that the main purpose behind property acquisition is central for tax characterization; merely intending to profit by sale does not make such profit taxable income, solidifying the importance of detailed factual analysis in distinguishing capital gains from business profits.