https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168323 A reimbursement of actual travel expenditure incurred in carrying out office duties was not an emolument chargeable under Schedule E because it was a repayment of disbursements, not a reward or personal profit. Travel between Fishguard and Haverfordwest was also deductible under rule 7 of Schedule 9 where, on the facts, the journey formed part of emergency hospital duties and was necessarily incurred in the performance of the office. The decision turns on the absence of any profit element in the reimbursement and on the journey being integral to the duties rather than merely ordinary commuting. en-us Wed, 26 Mar 1969 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Feb 2015 16:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168323 A reimbursement of actual travel expenditure incurred in carrying out office duties was not an emolument chargeable under Schedule E because it was a repayment of disbursements, not a reward or personal profit. Travel between Fishguard and Haverfordwest was also deductible under rule 7 of Schedule 9 where, on the facts, the journey formed part of emergency hospital duties and was necessarily incurred in the performance of the office. The decision turns on the absence of any profit element in the reimbursement and on the journey being integral to the duties rather than merely ordinary commuting. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 26 Mar 1969 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168323