Search results
736 results ordered by
Wilkes – HMRC's discovery assessments were invalidly issued
In HMRC v Jason Wilkes [2021] UKUT 150 (TCC), the Upper Tribunal (UT) dismissed HMRC's appeal against a decision of the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) which held that discovery assessments issued by HMRC to assess the high income child benefit charge (HICBC), were invalid.
Read moreKelly – Tax tribunal confirms re-discovery not permissible for the purposes of section 29 TMA
In Sean Kelly v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 162, the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) confirmed the principle that a discovery can only be made once and HMRC cannot raise a new discovery assessment under section 29,Taxes Management Act 1970 (TMA), in respect of the same discovery.
Read moreWalewski - Mixed partnership rules mean profit can be reallocated for whole period of account
Corporate member tax planning ineffective as profits allocated to partner in partnership for period during which it was a partner under mixed partnership rules.
Read moreAvonside Roofing – Tax Tribunal sets aside Schedule 36 information notice
In Avonside Roofing Ltd v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 158 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) set aside an information notice issued under paragraph 1, Schedule 36, Finance Act 2008 (the Notice), on the basis that the information and documents requested by HMRC were not reasonably required for the purpose of checking the recipient's tax position.
Read moreSiddiqui - No proper ground for setting aside summons in private prosecution
Private prosecution not to be quashed due to failure to disclose settlement agreement.
Read moreGolamreza – HMRC assessments and the burden of proof
In Golamreza Qolaminejite (aka A Cooper) v HMRC [2021] UKUT 118 (TCC), the Upper Tribunal (UT) allowed the taxpayer's appeal in part on the basis that the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) had erred in law in failing to take all of the taxpayer's case into account in arriving at its decision.
Read morePerring – Burden of proof for establishing that documents are 'reasonably required' in taxpayer information notice appeal is on HMRC
In Perring v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 110, the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) held that the burden of proof for establishing that documents are "reasonably required" under a taxpayer notice issued under Schedule 36, Finance Act 2008 (FA 2008) lies with HMRC.
Read moreAozora - Unilateral credit for US withholding tax allowed even where no treaty relief available
US UK double tax treaty and associated UK legislation interpreted to give unilateral credit for withholding tax suffered on interest income.
Read moreRediscovering ADR
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), in the form of mediation, remains an important part of the tax dispute resolution process. In light of the backlog of cases caused by Covid-19, and the practice statement issued by the Tribunal last year, we expect that taxpayers and HMRC will begin to re-examine and embrace ADR which can be an effective method of resolving disputes with HMRC.
Read moreTooth – Supreme Court rejects the concept of 'staleness' and confirms the meaning of 'deliberate'
In HMRC v Tooth [2021] UKSC 17, the Supreme Court, in dismissing HMRC's appeal, confirmed that a discovery assessment issued under section 20, Taxes Management Act 1970 (TMA) will not be invalid because a large period of time had elapsed between the discovery being made and the assessment being issued by HMRC and that for a taxpayer to bring about a loss of tax as a result of a deliberate inaccuracy in a document there must be an intention to mislead HMRC.
Read moreHargreaves - Burden of proof on HMRC in taxpayer information notice appeals
In Hargreaves and others v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 80 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) confirmed that the burden of proof in an appeal against an information notice issued under paragraph 1, Schedule 36, Finance Act 2008 (FA 2008), is on HMRC.
Read moreDaarasp – Loss claims denied as closure notices were valid
In Daarasp LLP & Betex LLP v HMRC [2021] UKUT 0087, the Upper Tribunal (UT) upheld the First-tier Tribunal's (FTT) decision and dismissed the taxpayers' claims for losses as the conclusions in HMRC's closure notices were not inconsistent with the losses being reduced to zero in the taxpayers' returns.
Read moreComtek – Counteraction steps taken after Follower Notice deadline can reduce penalty
Follower notice penalty for SDLT scheme follower notice reinstated but reduced by Upper Tribunal, and guidance given as to meaning of 'counteraction' in APN / accelerated payment notice context.
Read moreEuromoney – Tribunal considers 'main purpose' test
In Euromoney Institutional Investor PLC v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 0061 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) upheld the appellant's appeal, finding that the avoidance of liability to tax was a purpose, but not the main purpose, or one of the main purposes, of the relevant arrangements, for the purposes of section 137(1), Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 (TCGA).
Read moreMehrban – Discovery assessments invalid due to staleness
In Kashif Mehrban v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 53 (TC) the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) held that a three-year delay in issuing a 'discovery' assessment issued pursuant to section 29,Taxes Management Act 1970 (TMA), resulted in the discovery becoming 'stale', even though the delay had not been the result of HMRC inaction.
Read moreInmarsat Global – Upper Tribunal confirms successor company not entitled to capital allowances incurred by its predecessor on satellite launch costs
In Inmarsat Global Ltd v HMRC [2021] UKUT 59 (TCC), the Upper Tribunal (UT) upheld the First-tier Tribunal's (FTT) decision that a company was not eligible for capital allowances in relation to expenditure incurred by its predecessor on launching satellites into space.
Read moreCaught in the act
The furlough scheme has become ‘a magnet for fraudsters’. Adam Craggs and Alice Kemp outline the extensive powers HMRC can muster to investigate ‘high risk’ claims and to claw back any undue payments.
Read moreContentious tax quarterly review
Rise in alternative dispute resolution Until relatively recently, HMRC imposed strict conditions on the timing of when an application for alternative dispute resolution (ADR) could be made, refusing to consider any application which was made after it had formally set out its position in its ‘statement of case’.
Read moreBalhousie - sale and leaseback does not constitute disposal of 'entire interest' in property
In Balhousie Holdings Ltd v HMRC [2021] UKSC 11, the Supreme Court allowed the taxpayer’s appeal, holding that a sale and leaseback was not a disposal of the taxpayer’s ‘entire interest’ in a care home and accordingly HMRC was not entitled to claw back the benefit of the VAT zero-rating that had applied when the taxpayer acquired the home.
Read moreBennedy's Developments – Tribunal allows taxpayer's appeal against daily penalties for late filing of ATED return
In Bennedy's Developments Ltd v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 21 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) has allowed the taxpayer's appeal against daily penalties for late filing of an Annual Tax on Enveloped Dwellings (ATED) return, issued under paragraph 4 of Schedule 55 to the Finance Act 2009 (FA 2009), but dismissed its appeal against a late filing penalty in respect of the same return, issued under paragraph 5 of Schedule 55.
Read moreOutram – Tribunal prevents HMRC from relying on new argument
In Outram and another v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 29 (TC) the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) prevented HMRC from relying on a new argument contained in its skeleton argument which had not been included in its statement of case.
Read moreEastern Power Networks – Court of Appeal confirms that HMRC does not need to close its enquiries
In Eastern Power Networks plc and others v HMRC [2021] EWCA Civ 283, the Court of Appeal (CofA) has upheld the Upper Tribunal's (UT) decision that it was not appropriate to direct HMRC to issue closure notices.
Read moreBall Europe - Accounting entry not included in tax return sufficient to preclude discovery assessment
In Ball Europe Ltd v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 23 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) has held that the presence of amounts in a taxpayer's accounts but not its tax return was sufficient for a 'hypothetical officer' of HMRC reasonably to be expected to be aware of a tax insufficiency and this prevented HMRC from issuing a valid discovery assessment
Read moreThe long arm of HMRC
Adam Craggs and Alice Kemp outline the powers HMRC has at its disposal when conducting a criminal rather than civil investigation.
Read moreQuentin Skinner – shares sold by trusts not eligible for entrepreneurs' relief
In HMRC v The Quentin Skinner 2005 Settlement L and others [2021] UKUT 29 (TCC), the Upper Tribunal (UT) has held that, for the purposes of entrepreneurs' relief (ER) (now business asset disposal relief), section 169J(4), Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 (TCGA) requires a beneficiary to have been a qualifying beneficiary throughout a period of one year ending no earlier than three years before the date of disposal of settlement business assets by the trustees.
Read moreAtholl House Productions: BBC Presenter wins IR35 case
In HMRC v Atholl House Productions Ltd [2021] UKUT 0037 (TCC), the Upper Tribunal (UT) held that IR35 did not apply to a presenter who provided services to the BBC through a personal service company.
Read moreDitton – HMRC cannot issue daily late filing penalties retrospectively
In Ditton v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 489 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (the FTT) held that daily late filing penalties, where notice was given by HMRC to the taxpayer after the period in respect of which the penalties were issued, were void; confirming that late filing penalties cannot be issued to taxpayers retrospectively.
Read moreHelpful guidance on the role of statements of case and Lists of Issues for Disclosure in applications to vary an order for Extended Disclosure under the Disclosure Pilot Scheme
The High Court in HMRC v IGE USA Investments Ltd and Ors [2020] EWHC 1716 (Ch) confirms jurisdiction to order specific disclosure under the Disclosure Pilot Scheme is not confined to issues identifiable from statements of case and where there is no agreed or approved List of Issues for Disclosure.
Read moreSSE Generation – Taxpayer's capital allowances victory marred by procedural issue
In HMRC v SSE Generation Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 105, the Court of Appeal (CA) upheld the Upper Tribunal's (UT) decision that expenditure on parts of a hydroelectric power scheme was eligible for capital allowances, save for one element in respect of which the taxpayer had failed to seek permission to appeal part of the First-tier Tribunal's (FTT) decision.
Read moreBradford – Tribunal refuses HMRC's application for further and better particulars
In Darren Bradford v HMRC [2021] UKFTT 2 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) refused HMRC's application for the Appellant to provide further and better particulars of his grounds of appeal and directed HMRC to provide its Statement of Case.
Read moreEmbiricos: HMRC cannot issue a partial closure notice without specifying the amount of tax due
In HMRC v Embiricos [2020] UKUT 370 (TCC), the Upper Tribunal (UT),in allowing HMRC's appeal, has held that HMRC cannot issue a partial closure notice without specifying how much tax is due.
Read moreWarshaw – Cumulative preference shares constituted ordinary share capital and qualified for entrepreneurs' relief
In HMRC v Stephen Warshaw [2020] UKUT 366 (TCC), the Upper Tribunal (UT) has upheld the First-tier Tribunal's (FTT) decision that cumulative preference shares with rights to compound accrued but unpaid dividends constituted "ordinary share capital" for the purposes of section 989, Income Tax Act 2007 (ITA) and therefore qualified for entrepreneurs' relief (ER).
Read moreRialas: UT dismisses HMRC's appeal in transfer of assets abroad case
Taxpayer succeeds in defending HMRC appeal against transfer of assets abroad / TOAA regime application; anti-avoidance measures did not apply, held the Upper Tribunal.
Read moreDevelopment Securities – Court of Appeal considers company tax residence
In HMRC v Development Securities PLC and Others [2020] EWCA Civ 1705, the Court of Appeal (CoA) has allowed HMRC's appeal against a decision of the Upper Tribunal (UT) and confirmed that certain Jersey based companies were resident in the UK, rather than in Jersey.
Read moreProject Blue (No 2): HMRC must refund overpaid SDLT
In Project Blue Ltd v HMRC [2020] UKFTT 475 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) held that the taxpayer was entitled to repayment of SDLT, as part of the consideration for the property in question was contingent, within the meaning of section 51, Finance Act 2003 (FA 2003) and was never paid.
Read moreLondon Clubs Management - non-negotiable chips and promotional vouchers not part of casino's "banker's profits" for the purpose of calculating gaming duty
In HMRC v London Clubs Management Ltd [2020] UKSC 49, the Supreme Court held that where casinos provide gamblers with non-negotiable chips and/or promotional vouchers (Non-negs) which could be used for gaming but not encashed or exchanged for goods or services, they do not form part of the casino's "banker's profits" for the purpose of calculating its liability to gaming duty.
Read moreEurochoice: Company and its director held jointly and severally liable for HMRC's costs
In Eurochoice Ltd v HMRC [2020] UKFTT 449 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) has held that a company and its director are jointly and severally liable for HMRC's costs in circumstances where only the company was party to the appeal proceedings.
Read moreTotal – Court of Appeal considers meaning of "just and reasonable" apportionment of profits
In Total E&P North Sea UK Ltd and Another v HMRC [2020] EWCA Civ 1419, the Court of Appeal (CoA) allowed the appellant companies' appeal and decided that the basis of the companies' apportionment of adjusted ring-fence profits was just and reasonable, for the purposes of an election under section 7(5), Finance Act 2011 (FA 2011).
Read moreMcCabe: HMRC not required to disclose documents relating to discussions with the Belgian tax authority
In Kevin McCabe v HMRC [2020] UKUT 266 (TC), the Upper Tribunal (UT) has held that the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) had been correct not to order HMRC to disclose documents relating to discussions it had with the Belgian tax authority, as the documents had no probative value and the tax authorities had raised confidentiality issues.
Read moreRT Rate: Legitimate expectation rights not engaged
In RT Rate Ltd and Others v HMRC [2020] UKFTT 392 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) has held that it does not have jurisdiction to consider claims for repayment of VAT based on the EU law principle of legitimate expectation.
Read moreAMW Estates – Part of HMRC's pleaded case struck out as it had no realistic prospect of success
In AMW Estates Ltd v HMRC [2020] UKFTT 410 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) struck out part of HMRC's amended Statement of Case (SoC) alleging that a taxpayer had actual or constructive knowledge of its supplier's fraud as it had no realistic prospect of success.
Read moreOsborne: Tribunal takes a dive into allowable expenditure
In Robert John Osborne v HMRC [2020] UKFTT 373 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) held that expenditure on fitness training was allowed because it was wholly and exclusively incurred for the purpose of the taxpayer's occupation as a saturation diver.
Read moreCheshire Centre – HMRC ordered to pay taxpayer's costs due to its unreasonable behaviour
In HMRC v Cheshire Centre for Independent Living [2020] UKUT 275 (TCC), the Upper Tribunal (UT) ordered HMRC to pay the taxpayer's costs even though HMRC had been successful as it had acted unreasonably in introducing a new ground of appeal.
Read moreHMRC issues nudge letters targeting residence and domicile
In an extension of its 'nudge' letters campaign, HMRC is writing to wealthy taxpayers encouraging them to bring their tax affairs into line.
Read moreBelloul – Ignorance of the law was a 'reasonable excuse'
In Bachir Mohamed Belloul v HMRC [2020] UKFTT 312, the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) held that a taxpayer's ignorance of the law was a 'reasonable excuse' for failing to notify HMRC of his liability to pay High Income Child Benefit Charge (HICBC).
Read moreJurisdiction and the Rule of Law
In R (oao Boulting & Anor) v HMRC [2020] EWHC 2207 (Admin), the High Court refused permission to bring a judicial review claim against HMRC, on the basis that the taxpayer had an 'alternative remedy'.
Read moreWired Orthodontics – Tribunal expresses concern about potential inappropriate interference by HMRC's solicitor with the evidence of an independent expert witness
In Wired Orthodontics Ltd and others v HMRC [2020] UKFTT 290 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) refused an application for disclosure of documents and information passing between the solicitors for HMRC and their appointed expert witness.
Read moreBox – child benefit charge interpreted as 'income' for the purpose of discovery assessments
In Martin Richard Box v HMRC [2020] UKFTT 353 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) dismissed a taxpayer's appeal concerning liability to pay the high-income child benefit (HICB) charge, on the basis that the charge constituted income for the purpose of discovery assessments.
Read moreIrish Bank – HMRC entitled to disallow interest deductions claimed by UK permanent establishments
In Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Ltd (in special liquidation) and another v HMRC [2020] EWCA Civ 1128, the Court of Appeal upheld the decisions of the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) and the Upper Tribunal (UT) and confirmed that HMRC was entitled to disallow interest deductions claimed by the UK permanent establishments (PEs) of two Irish companies.
Read moreRBS – HMRC's application for specific disclosure refused
In Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc v HMRC [2020] UKFTT 321 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) refused an application by HMRC for a direction requiring the taxpayer to provide specific disclosure.
Read moreStay connected and subscribe to our latest insights and views
Subscribe Here