Vol. 19 (2015): Special Edition 1

Articles

• The “tax storiesâ€

  EM Stack

  I-XI

  • PDF

• The Cohen and Kuttel stories: Is the place where I hang my hat still relevant to determine my residence for tax purposes?

  J Arendse, K Stark, C Renaud

  1-24

  • PDF

• Ochberg v CIR: No “benefit†to the benefactor

  K Coetzee, P van der Zwan, D Shutte, H van Dyk, EM Stack

  25-46

  • PDF

• Pyott case: A lasting deposit for our tax heritage

  A C Engelbrecht, G K Goldswain, A Heyns

  47-70

  • PDF

• The Lategan case:1 The accrual principle – then and now

  L van Zyl

  97-120

  • PDF

• MP Finance Group CC (In Liquidation) v C: SARS: Adding to the financial hardship of victims of illegal transactions

  J MP Venter, W R Uys, M C van Dyk

  121-138

  • PDF

• CIR v Niko: A question of economic reality

  E M Stack, M Stiglingh, A Koekemoer

  139-160

  • PDF

• Commissioner for Inland Revenue v Lever Brothers and Unilever Ltd: A practical problem of source

  E M Stack, D Grenville, R Poole, H Harnett, E Horn

  161-182

  • PDF

• Crossing the Rubicon: Is the use of a realisation company still a viable tax planning tool?

  W R Uys, K L de Hart, J S Wilcocks, J MP Venter

  183-205

  • PDF

• The Port Elizabeth Electric Tramway case:1 Is the meaning ascribed to the phrase “in the production of the income†by Watermeyer AJP in the Port Elizabeth Electric Tramway case still religiously followed today?

  G K Goldswain, O Swart

  71-96

  • PDF