Capital allowance

Capital allowance is a specialized practice area in Singapore's legal system. This area encompasses 4 cases from 2013 to 2024.

Leading Law Firms

Analysis of law firms specializing in Capital allowance, ranked by case volume and success rates.

Law FirmCases
Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (Law Division)100.00% success rate3 cases75.0% of area
WongPartnership LLP0.00% success rate1 cases25.0% of area
Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP0.00% success rate1 cases25.0% of area
Drew & Napier LLC0.00% success rate1 cases25.0% of area
Straits Law Practice LLC0.00% success rate1 cases25.0% of area
KhattarWong LLP0.00% success rate1 cases25.0% of area

Notable Lawyers

Leading lawyers practicing in Capital allowance, ranked by case volume and success rates.

LawyerCases
Bjorn Lee Long Jin100.00% success rate2 cases50.0% of area
Tan Shao Tong0.00% success rate1 cases25.0% of area
Goh Ziluo0.00% success rate1 cases25.0% of area
Flora Koh Swee Huang100.00% success rate1 cases25.0% of area
N Sreenivasan0.00% success rate1 cases25.0% of area
Deborah Evaline Barker0.00% success rate1 cases25.0% of area
Vikna Rajah0.00% success rate1 cases25.0% of area
Koh Chon Kiat0.00% success rate1 cases25.0% of area
Timothy Tan Ding Yuan100.00% success rate1 cases25.0% of area
Pang Mei Yu100.00% success rate1 cases25.0% of area

Recent Judgments

Displaying 4 most recent judgments out of 4 total cases

No.TitleCourtDecision DateOutcomes
1Changi Airport Group v Comptroller of Income Tax: Capital Allowance for Airport InfrastructureGeneral Division of the High Court31 Oct 2024
Appeal Dismissed
2Singapore Cement Manufacturing v Comptroller of Income Tax: Capital Allowance for Cement SiloGeneral Division of the High Court09 Mar 2023
Appeal Dismissed
3BZZ v Comptroller of Income Tax: Capital Allowance & Income Tax Act InterpretationHigh Court of the Republic of Singapore23 Oct 2019
Appeal dismissed
4World Sport Group v Dorsey James Michael: Pre-Action Interrogatories & DefamationHigh Court09 Apr 2013
Appeal allowed in part. The defendant had to answer interrogatories nos 1, 2(a), 2(b), 2(c), 6 and 6.1.