Snow and will incurred costs so legal costs in particular. Other costs like surveying costs and advertisement they took out. These costs wer to do with defending themsleve as they have been criticised by the parliament and various other places in order to remain in business they had to invest in their business incurring a lot of costs in doing that. So Legal fees, advertising costs, , surveyors, valuors. But then When they claim that as a ded, commissioner of taxation denied that and argued in this case that the exp was unconnected with the business. So the business is building houses, the commissioner of taxation said those exp are unrelated to this business. Snow and wil argued said that you should be looking at purpose, why that exp was undertaken. What they talk about in this case was the character of the advantaged sought. Why did the tax payer incur these reasonably substantial legal costs. shorten