Explain why the receipts in Egerton-Warburton &amp Ors v DFC of T(1934) 51 CLR 568 were assessable but the receipts in IRC vRamsay (1935) 1 All ER 847 were treated as capital amounts.

Explain why the receipts in Egerton-Warburton & Ors v DFC of T
(1934) 51 CLR 568 were assessable, but the receipts in IRC v
Ramsay (1935) 1 All ER 847 were treated as capital amounts.

 

 

Fred, an executive of a British corporation specialising in
management consultancy, comes to Australia to set up a branch of
his company. Although the length of his stay is not certain, he
leases a residence in Melbourne for 12 months. His wife
accompanies him on the trip but his teenage sons, having just
commenced college, stay in London. Fred rents out the family home.
Apart from the absence of his children, Fred¬ôs daily behaviour is
relatively similar to his behaviour before entering Australia. As well
as the rent on the UK property, Fred earns interest from
investments he has in France. Because of ill health Fred returns to
the UK 11 months after arriving in Australia.
Requirement
Discuss whether Fred is a resident of Australia for taxation
purposes.

note:we have to mention 4 case study similar to the previews one. explain few sentences about every case and how its relate to the main one.

Question 2 (5 marks)
Explain why the receipts in Egerton-Warburton & Ors v DFC of T
(1934) 51 CLR 568 were assessable, but the receipts in IRC v
Ramsay (1935) 1 All ER 847 were treated as capital amounts.