A publican’s payment for the domestic rental of a flat above the public house was not deductible for income tax purposes, since it was not incurred entirely and exclusively for business purposes.
Times 02-Aug-1996, Gazette 16-Oct-1996
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 74
England and Wales
Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.83559
Where a Building Society employee had a loan on favourable terms unavailable to the public, but switched to a mortgage on a publicly available fixed rate, the new arrangement was not a new loan as such, and did not qualify for tax exemption.
Times 09-Feb-1999
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 161(1A)
England and Wales
Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.90386
Profits were taxable as a whole for a new business purchased and existing business. Business bought to incorporate in existing taxed on preceding year basis.
Ind Summary 12-Jul-1993, Times 12-Jul-1993
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970 154, Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 113
England and Wales
Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.83323
Additional business acquired; matter of fact if enlargement of existing.
Gazette 08-Sep-1993
England and Wales
Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.83324
[2018] UKUT 257 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.628093
UTTC INCOME TAX – whether deeming provision in s 118(2) TMA could apply to deem out of time claim for repayment of income tax under Schedule 1AB TMA to have been in time where taxpayer had reasonable excuse – yes – whether tribunal had jurisdiction to hear the issue of whether claim out of time – yes – whether provisions on notices of enquiry and closure notices in Schedule 1A TMA enabled notice of enquiry and closure to be issued in immediate succession and in one document- yes – UT’s decision in Portland Gas Storage Limited considered – appeal allowed
[2015] UKUT 579 (TCC), [2016] STC 656, [2015] STI 3364, [2015] BTC 532
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.558944
UTTC INCOME TAX – self-assessment – ITA ss 64, 131 – claim for relief to be ‘carried back’ intimated in earlier year return – whether FA 2008 s 130 engaged and HMRC able to set off disputed income tax liability against VAT repayment admitted to be due – TMA ss 8, 9, 9A, 42, Schs 1A, 1B – HMRC v Cotter considered – Cotter binding on this tribunal and determinative in applicant’s favour – no debit on account against which set-off could be effected VAT – whether use of FA 2008 s 130 to refuse immediate VAT repayment a proportionate remedy – yes
[2013] UKUT 383 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.521012
The tax payers appealed against a finding that they had been self employed contractors and not employees while working as entertainers on cruise ships.
Mann J
[2012] UKUT 229 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.513617
INCOME TAX – relief for expenditure – ITTOIA s 34 – whether expenditure wholly and exclusively incurred for purposes of trade – inadequate findings of fact by First-tier Tribunal – appeal allowed and case remitted to First-tier Tribunal for re-hearing
[2011] UKUT 419 (TCC), [2011] STI 2998, [2011] BTC 1882, [2011] STC 2226
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.448061
Agency workers – income tax and NICs – whether obligation to provide personal services – right of substitution- whether difference between ICTA 1988 and ITEPA 2003
[2011] UKUT 423 (TCC)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.448064
Construction Industry Scheme — appeal against removal of gross payment status — whether ‘reasonable excuse’ within paragraph 12 (3) Schedule 11 Finance Act 2004 – whether defaults to be disregarded under Regulation 32 The Income Tax (Construction Industry Scheme) Regulations 2005 — whether Appellant failed ‘reason to expect’ test in paragraph 12 (7) Schedule 11 Finance Act 2004 — appeal dismissed.
[2010] UKFTT 347 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.422317
Income tax – Schedule D, Cases III and VI – Payments of interest and ground rent incurred when property was being developed – Whether capitalised or paid out of profits or gains brought into charge to tax – Income Tax Act 1952 (15 and 16 Geo. 6 and 1 Eliz. 2, c. 10), j. 170.
The House was invited to depart from its own precedent set eleven years before. Lord Wilberforce said: ‘There is therefore nothing left to the appellant but to contend – as he frankly does – that the 1965 decision is wrong. This contention means, when interpreted, that three or more of your Lordships ought to take the view which appealed then to the minority.
My Lords, in my firm opinion, the Practice Statement of 1966 was never intended to allow and should not be considered to allow such a course. Nothing could be more undesirable, in fact, than to permit litigants, after a decision has been given by this House with all appearance of finality, to return to this House in the hope that a differently constituted committee might be persuaded to take the view, which its predecessors rejected. True that the earlier decision was by majority: I say nothing as to its correctness or as to the validity of the reasoning by which it was supported. That there were two eminently possible views is shown by the support for each by at any rate, two members of the House. But doubtful issues have to be resolved and the law knows no better way of resolving them than by the considered majority opinion of the ultimate tribunal. It requires much more than doubts as to the correctness of such opinion to justify departing from it.’
Lord Wilberforce, Lord Salmon and Lord Keith
[1977] 1 WLR 1345, [1977] UKHL TC – 51 – 708, [1977] 3 All ER 996, [1977] STC 397, [1977] TR 217, 51 TC 708
England and Wales
Cited – Practice Statement (Judicial Precedent) HL 1966
The House gave guidance how it would treat an invitation to depart from a previous decision of the House. Such a course was possible, but the direction was not an ‘open sesame’ for a differently constituted committee to prefer their views to those . .
Cited – Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust HL 16-Oct-2003
The claimant was disabled, and sought sterilisation because she feared the additional difficulties she would face as a mother. The sterilisation failed. She sought damages.
Held: The House having considered the issue in MacFarlane only . .
Applied – McDonnell v Congregation of Christian Brothers Trustees (Formerly Irish Christian Brothers) and others HL 4-Dec-2003
In 2000, the claimant sought damages for sexual abuse from before 1951. The issue was as to whether the limitation law which applied was that as at the date of the incidents, or that which applied as at the date when he would be deemed uner the . .
Cited – Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others HL 8-Mar-2006
In each case the local authority sought to recover possession of its own land. In the Lambeth case, they asserted this right as against an overstaying former tenant, and in the Leeds case as against gypsies. In each case the occupiers said that the . .
Cited – Gibson v United States of America PC 23-Jul-2007
(The Bahamas) The US government sought the extradition of the appellant from the Bahamas on drugs charges. The warrants were found to be void, and the defendant released unconditionally, when the nmagistrate rejected evidence from an admitted . .
Cited – Regina v Kansal (2) HL 29-Nov-2001
The prosecutor had lead and relied at trial on evidence obtained by compulsory questioning under the 1986 Act.
Held: In doing so the prosecutor was acting to give effect to section 433.
The decision in Lambert to disallow retrospective . .
Cited – Willers v Joyce and Another (Re: Gubay (Deceased) No 2) SC 20-Jul-2016
The Court was asked whether and in what circumstances a lower court may follow a decision of the Privy Council which has reached a different conclusion from that of the House of Lords (or the Supreme Court or Court of Appeal) on an earlier occasion. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.186956
A penalty imposed for a refusal to state the source of a taxpayer’s funds was proper.
Times 10-Apr-1997
England and Wales
Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.84721
(New Zealand)
Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Nolan, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Clyde, Sir John Balcombe
[1998] UKPC 42
England and Wales
Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159324
(New Zealand)
Lord Nolan, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle, Lord Hoffmann, Sir Christopher Staughton
[1998] UKPC 43, [1999] 1 WLR 873
England and Wales
Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159323
(Hong Kong) The taxpayer company was winding down its business. As it closed it made substantial redundancy payments to its employees. The Commissioners rejected a suggestion that such payments could be set off against income, saying that the payments had not been made, as required by the statute, ‘for the purpose of producing such profits; ‘
Held: The test was indistinguishable form that applicable under UK law. ‘The severance payments were properly accepted by the Board of Review, by Findlay J (dissenting) and by the majority of the Court of Appeal as representing expenditure both for the purpose of producing profits and in the production of profits. The obligation to make them was contingent, like many of the employer’s other contractual or statutory obligations, but was nonetheless incurred as a necessary condition of retaining the services of the employees concerned.’
Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord Nolan, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Clyde
[1997] UKPC 42
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 74
Cited – Strong and Co of Romsey Ltd v Woodifield HL 30-Jul-1906
The company sought to deduct from its trading profits a sum expended paying damages for personal injuries to a visitor to the taxpayer’s Inn. The claim had been rejected.
Held: The company’s appeal failed. Lord Davey said: ‘I think that the . .
Cited – Godden v A Wilson’s Stores (Holdings) Ltd 1962
The company traded as rubber planters. A manager’s contract allowed for six months’ notice. The company agreed to sell its estates, and the sale was completed and the trade of the company discontinued. The manager was given notice to terminate his . .
Cited – Commissioners of Inland Revenue v The Anglo Brewing Co. Ltd 1925
The company sought to set off against income tax, ex gratia payments it had made to employees as the business closed.
Held: Rowlatt J said: ‘Now I cannot conceive how, under those circumstances, there can be any evidence at all that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159251
Mauritius – Appeal from an order of the Court of Appeal of Mauritius, dismissing an appeal from an order by which the learned judge struck out the appellant’s pleaded defence to a claim for income tax (and a counterclaim for repayment of money recovered by the Commissioner) on the ground that they disclosed no reasonable grounds of defence or cause of action.
Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Cooke of Thorndon
[1996] UKPC 45
Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159204
[1996] UKPC 54; [1996] New Zealand UKPC 46
Cited – Sharkey v Wernher HL 1955
Where a trader takes stock from his business for private use or for use in another business which he owns, or where he transfers to his business stock which he owns in some other capacity than that of proprietor of that business, the transfer should . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159206
Tax Credits and Family Credit – Deductions and Income Assessments
[2019] UKUT 5 (AAC)
England and Wales
Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.635125
The inspector of taxes had power to issue a notice requiring access to legally privileged material. The power given by the section included certain exceptions, and those were not to be extended. The special or general commissioners had no power to hear from a taxpayer oral representations as to the issue of such a notice. The statutory procedure requiring the inspector to place all matters before the commissioner when applying for the commissioner’s consent to the notice was a substitute for any inter partes procedure, and displaced any such entirely.
Gazette 03-May-2001, Times 17-Apr-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 329
Taxes Management Act 1970 20(1)
England and Wales
Appeal from – Regina v A Special Commissioner, ex parte Morgan Grenfell and Co Ltd Admn 8-Nov-2000
The rights of the inspectors to demand papers under the Act could override the protection of legal privilege which might otherwise be given to them. Construing the Act as a whole it was clear that legal professional privilege was not respected save . .
Cited – Three Rivers District Council and others v Governor and Company of the Bank of England (No 6) HL 11-Nov-2004
The Bank anticipated criticism in an ad hoc enquiry which was called to investigate its handling of a matter involving the claimant. The claimant sought disclosure of the documents created when the solicitors advised employees of the Bank in . .
Appeal from – Regina v Special Commissioner And Another, ex parte Morgan Grenfell and Co Ltd HL 16-May-2002
The inspector issued a notice requiring production of certain documents. The respondents refused to produce them, saying that they were protected by legal professional privilege.
Held: Legal professional privilege is a fundamental part of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147457
Between them, several shareholders held all the shares of a company, but each owned less than thirty per cent. They claimed BES relief. The tax inspector asserted that they were deemed to be associates of each other under the section, and that accordingly each had an interest in more than thirty per cent of the company, and the relief was not available. The definition of ‘associate’ was not to be artificially restricted.
Times 16-Jan-2001, [2000] EWCA Civ 309
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 417(3) 291(8)
England and Wales
Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147342
Whether pension fund trustees were engaging in the sub-under-writing of share issues in return for commission payments, was a question of fact for the original court hearing the case, and it was not for an appeal court to set aside that finding of fact because of a mistake in the law. In this case the special commissioners that it was not trading would be re-instated.
Times 07-Mar-2000, Gazette 09-Mar-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 55
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 Sch D Case 1
England and Wales
Cited – Cape Brandy Syndicate v Inland Revenue Commissioners CA 1921
Rowlatt J said: ‘In a taxing Act one has to look merely at what is clearly said. There is no room for any intendment. There is no equity about a tax. There is no presumption as to a tax. Nothing is to be read in, nothing is to be implied’ and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147088
A payment made by an employer on the termination of a contract in lieu of notice was taxable as an emolument, where the right to notice was reserved by the employment contract The reason for a notice period from an employee’s point of view was not that they wanted to work, but that they wanted to be paid until they found other work. Discussing what was an ’emolument’, section 43 does not require an emolument to be a taxable emolument, so that even if the payment is made at a time when the recipient employee is outside the charge to income tax, the payment will still retain its character as an emolument.
Chadwick LJ
Times 31-Aug-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1868, [2000] 1 WLR 540
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 19(1) Sched E Case 1, Finance Act 1989 43
England and Wales
Cited – MacDonald (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Dextra Accessories Ltd and others CA 28-Jan-2004
The company had set up a trust for the benefit of its employees. The Inspector sought to tax the payments made into the trust as ’emoluments’
Held: The appeal was allowed. The payments were ‘potential emoluments’ which were held by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.146783
Income Tax, Schedule D, Cases. IV and V – Foreign trust – British beneficiary having sole life interest – Basis of assessment.
[1927] UKHL TC – 11 – 749, [1927] 1 KB 109
England and Wales
Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.634148
The income of a trust estate for a certain year included a sum of pounds 72,231 untaxed interest on certain Government securities. Held ( aff. the judgment of the Second Division) that in computing their income for the purpose of assessment under Schedule D of the Income Tax Act 1918 the trustees were not entitled to deduct from the said sum of pounds 72,231 a sum of pounds 21,847 which they had paid during the year as interest on estate duty.
Viscount Cave, Viscount Finlay, Lord Dunedin, Lord Shaw, and Lord Sumner
[1924] UKHL 477, 61 SLR 477
England and Wales
Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.631555
Appeal from rejection of challenge to imposition of charge to tax on ‘disguised remuneration’
[2020] EWCA Civ 1744
England and Wales
Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.656876
Income Tax – Schedule D, First Case – English Company – Railway abroad – Profits – Remittance.
[1895] UKHL TC – 3 – 407, 3 TC 407
England and Wales
Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.634061
Income tax – Schedule 55 Finance Act 2009 – fixed and daily penalties for late filing of self-assessment return – income received from car park investment scheme – Appellant resident in Malaysia – unaware of need to file return – informed by scheme promoter that income not taxable because within UK annual personal allowance – whether reasonable excuse – yes – appeal allowed
[2020] UKFTT 467 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.656846
INCOME TAX – individual tax return – late filing penalties under Schedule 55 Finance Act 2009 – application for permission to make a late appeal – Martland applied – Application dismissed
[2020] UKFTT 458 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.656869
Application to make a late appeal – income tax – fixed and daily penalties for late filing of self-assessment return in 2010-11 – Appellant asserts that he received no self-employed income and had been advised by HMRC that he therefore had no need to register for self-assessment – substantial delay before submitting a paper return over four years later – whether reasonable excuse for delay in lodging appeal – no – application for permission to make a late appeal refused
[2020] UKFTT 479 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.656859
HL Income Tax, Schedule D – Annual payment made to a trading company- Whether trading receipt – Whether recipient entitled to repayment of tax – Income Tax Act, 1952 (15 and 16 Geo. VI and 1 Eliz. II, c. 10), Section 123, Schedule D, Case III.
[1962] UKHL TC – 40 – 550
England and Wales
Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.559959
The taxpayer claimed to deduct the legal costs of contesting an assessment to tax. The dispute was about the computation of the taxpayer’s profits. It assumed that those profits were ascertainable, one way or another, at the time when the dispute arose. The costs of the dispute could not therefore have been an element in the computation. They were logically as well as temporally subsequent to the profits having been earned.
[1948] AC 508
England and Wales
Cited – Newsom v Robertson ChD 30-Apr-1952
Mr Newsom, a practising barrister sought to set off against his income, the expenses of travelling between his home and his chambers in London. The Inspector appealed the decision of the commissioners that he could do so. The rule required that the . .
Cited – McKnight (Inspector of Taxes) v Sheppard HL 18-Jun-1999
The taxpayer sought to set off against tax some pounds 200,000 spent defending professional disciplinary proceedings. The House was asked whether this was ‘money wholly and exclusively laid out or expended for the purposes of the trade.’
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.197027
[2000] EWHC Admin 354
England and Wales
Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.140169
INCOME TAX – late filing and late payment penalties – whether deliberate behaviour – no – whether reasonable excuse – no – appeal upheld in part
[2020] UKFTT 463 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.656843
Income Tax, Schedule D-Business set up within the three years preceding the ‘year of assessment-Income Tax Act, 1918 {8 and 9 Geo. V, c. 40), Schedule D, Cases I and II, Rule 1 (2).
[1927] UKHL TC – 11 – 469
England and Wales
Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.634145
[2018] UKFTT 351 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.619295
[1911] UKHL TC – 5 – 693
England and Wales
Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.619222
INCOME TAX – penalty for late filing of tax return – appeal notified 107 days late to the Tribunal – Martland considered – no good reason for late appeal – appellant’s excuse for late-filing was oversight by accountants – no evidence of reasonable care by taxpayer to ensure return filed on time -weakness of appellant’s case – permission to make late appeal refused – appeal struck out
[2020] UKFTT 446 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.656841
Income Tax, Schedule D – English company controlled abroad – Residence – Rents arising abroad – Income Tax Act, 1918 (8 and 9 Geo. V, c. 40), Schedule D, Case V.
[1925] UKHL TC – 9 – 342
England and Wales
Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.633845
Income Tax – Schedule D
[1896] UKHL TC – 3 – 500
England and Wales
Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.634025
A firm of brewers were owners of an inn. A defective chimney fell and injured a guest, and the firm were found, in an action, liable in damages.
Held that in estimating the balance of the profits of their business for the purposes of income-tax the firm were not entitled to deduct the amount of damages so paid.
Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Macnaghten, Davey, James of Hereford, Robertson, and Atkinson
[1906] UKHL 624, 44 SLR 624
England and Wales
Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.625470
HL Income tax – M ortgage interest charged to capital – W hether payable out o f profits or gains brought into charge to tax – Appeal against first assessment to income tax fo r one year settled by agreement – W hether additional assessment competent – Income Tax Act 1952 (15 and 16 Geo. 6 and 1 Eliz. 2, c. 10), ss. 169, 170 and 510.
[1965] UKHL TC – 43 – 83, [1966] 2 WLR 251, [1966] AC 85, 43 TC 83, [1966] 1 All ER 1
Income Tax Act 1952 169 170 510
England and Wales
Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.559798
FTTTx PAYE – late payment of monthly PAYE – whether payments made late – Yes. Whether appellant had reasonable excuse for the failure – No. Whether Special reduction should apply – No.
[2013] UKFTT 734 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.519624
Payments which were made in lieu of a termination notice were taxable, because the right to make such payments had been explicitly reserved in the contract of employment, and the payment was therefore under that contract.
Times 14-Nov-1997, Gazette 12-Nov-1997
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 19(1)
England and Wales
Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.80313
FTTTx Appeal against Personal Liability Notice issued against the Appellant as a director of a company which made no payments of PAYE or NIC to HMRC during period of trading – apportionment by HMRC between directors fair and equitable – statutory obligation of directors not delegable – appeal dismissed
[2012] UKFTT 308 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.462711
Steps which had been inserted into a commercial transaction, but which had no purpose other than the saving of tax are to be disregarded when assessing the tax effect of the scheme. The modern approach to statutory construction is to have regard to the purpose of a particular provision and interpret its language, so far as possible, in a way which best gives effect to that purpose. The particular vice of formalism in the interpretation had been the insistence of the courts on treating every transaction which had an individual legal identity as having its own separate tax consequences, whatever might be the terms of the statute.
Lord Steyn said that it was: ‘those two features – literal interpretation of tax statutes and the formalistic insistence on examining steps in a composite scheme separately – [which] allowed tax avoidance schemes to flourish.’ Lord Browne-Wilkinson: ‘The approach pioneered in Ramsay and developed in later decisions is an approach to construction, viz. that construing tax legislation, the statutory provisions are to be applied to the substance of the transaction, disregarding artificial steps in the composite transaction or series of transactions inserted only for the purpose of seeking to obtain a tax advantage. The question is not what was the effect of the insertion of the artificial steps but what was its purpose. Having identified the artificial steps inserted with that purpose and disregarded them, then what is left is to apply the statutory language of the taxing Act to the transaction carried through stripped of its artificial steps.’
Lord Steyn, Lord Browne-Wilkinson
Times 20-Jun-1997, Gazette 09-Jul-1997, [1997] UKHL 22, [1997] 1 WLR 991, [1997] 3 All ER 817
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970 478
England and Wales
Cited – W T Ramsay Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 12-Mar-1981
The taxpayers used schemes to create allowable losses, and now appealed assessment to tax. The schemes involved a series of transactions none of which were a sham, but which had the effect of cancelling each other out.
Held: If the true nature . .
Cited – Furniss (Inspector of Taxes) v Dawson HL 9-Feb-1983
The transfer of shares to a subsidiary as part of a planned scheme immediately to transfer them to an outside purchaser was regarded as a taxable disposition to the outside purchaser rather than an exempt transfer to a group company. In defined . .
Cited – Inland Revenue Commissioners v Plummer HL 1-Nov-1979
Although transactions were integrated as part of a preconceived scheme which was commercially marketed and that had no other conceivable purpose than that of saving surtax, the construction of the statute compelled the acceptance of a fiscal result . .
Cited – Inland Revenue Commissioners v Duke of Westminster HL 7-May-1935
The Duke’s gardener was paid weekly, but to reduce tax, his solicitors drew up a deed in which it was said that the earnings were not really wages, but were an annual payment payable by weekly instalments.
Held: To find out what the true . .
Cited – Pryce v Monmouthshire Canal and Railway Cos 1879
A taxpayer is entitled to stand on a literal construction of the words used regardless of the purpose of the statute. . .
Cited – Cape Brandy Syndicate v Inland Revenue Commissioners CA 1921
Rowlatt J said: ‘In a taxing Act one has to look merely at what is clearly said. There is no room for any intendment. There is no equity about a tax. There is no presumption as to a tax. Nothing is to be read in, nothing is to be implied’ and . .
Cited – Barclays Mercantile Business Finance Ltd v Mawson (HM Inspector of Taxes) HL 25-Nov-2004
The company had paid substantial sums out in establishing a gas pipeline, and claimed those sums against its tax as capital allowances. The transaction involved a sale and leaseback arrangement which the special commissioners had found to be a . .
Cited – Green and Another v Inland Revenue ChD 11-Jan-2005
The deceased died intestate and with a negative valued personal estate, but with assets in trusts, including a revocable life interest in property. The question was whether his debts could be set off against the trusts interests to reduce them below . .
Cited – Trennery v West (Inspector of Taxes) HL 27-Jan-2005
The House considered the application of the section to ‘flip-flop trusts’. The section allocated liability to charge on gains within a settlement under certain circumstances onto the settlor, and at his rate of tax. Assets were allocated to two . .
Cited – Peter John St. Barbe Green, David Robert Mitson (Trustees of the Will of Consuelo Dowager Duchess of Manchester v the Commissioners of Inland Revenue ChD 11-Jan-2005
The taxpayer appealed a notice of determination of liability of the estate for Inheritance Tax purposes. He sought to set off an excess of liabilities over assets in the deceased’s own estate against assets held in settlements.
Held: The . .
Cited – Norglen Ltd (In Liquidation) v Reeds Rains Prudential Ltd and Others; Circuit Systems Ltd (In Liquidation) and Another v Zuken-Redac HL 1-Dec-1997
An assignment of a cause of action by a company in liquidation was valid, even though the dominant purpose was to avoid having to give security for costs, and to get legal aid. In dismissing the argument that the transactions were a device to defeat . .
Cited – Ingram and Palmer-Tomkinson (Executors of the Estate of Lady Jane Lindsay Morgan Ingram Deceased) v Commissioners of Inland Revenue CA 28-Jul-1997
The deceased had first conveyed property to her solicitor. Leases back were then created in her favour, and then the freeholds were conveyed at her direction to her children and grandchildren. They were potentially exempt transfers.
Held: . .
Cited – Greenalls Management Ltd v Customs and Excise HL 12-May-2005
Volumes of vodka were transferred from a secure warehouse to a carrier for export. They were diverted, and not exported and the Customs sought the unpaid duty from the warehouse. The Directive provided that duty was payable on the ‘release for . .
Cited – HM Revenue and Customs v Salaried Persons Postal Loans Ltd ChD 7-Apr-2006
The company had ceased trading, but rental income was still generated from its former premises. The Revenue sought to include the receipt in calculations of whether the company was entitled to a small company corporation tax rate. The Revenue . .
Cited – Scottish Widows Plc v Revenue and Customs SC 6-Jul-2011
The taxpayer insurance company had transferred sums from accounts designated as Capital Reserves. The Revenue said that these were properly part of the profit and loss accounts for the respective tax years, and chargeable receipts.
Held: The . .
Cited – UBS Ag and Another v Revenue and Customs SC 9-Mar-2016
UBS AG devised an employee bonus scheme to take advantage of the provisions of Chapter 2 of the 2003 Act, with the sole purpose other than tax avoidance, and such consequential advantages as would flow from tax avoidance. Several pre-ordained steps . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.135195
INCOME TAX – police officers – dispute with Metropolitan Police concerning over-time payments – settlement agreement – sums paid in respect of legal fees and insurance – whether employment income
[2020] UKFTT 461 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.656855
Income Tax – Self-assessment – Penalties – Penalty for inaccurate return – Whether penalty was invalid if issued before the related tax – No – Whether error was ‘deliberate’- No -Appeal allowed in part
[2020] UKFTT 448 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.656844
NATIONAL INSURANCE CONTRIBUTIONS -whether contributions paid in period preceding record of appellant entering national insurance – whether additional contributions paid afterwards which were not reflected on appellant’s national insurance record -no -whether there was a duplicate contribution record – balancing weight of oral and other evidence of appellant against record and evidence on procedures for creation, maintenance and retrieval of national insurance contribution records- contributions record correct – appeal dismissed
[2012] UKFTT 490 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.466118
A company incorporated in England carried on from there an hotel business in Egypt until 1906. In that year they altered their Articles of Association by resolutions which provided that the Egyptian business of the company should be carried on and managed by a local board in Egypt to the exclusion of any board of directors other than the local board. The Commissioners had found that the head and seat and controlling power of the company remained in England with the board of directors of the company.
Held: Lord Parker and Lord Sumner found that the trade or business of the company was carried on wholly outside the United Kingdom while Lord Parmoor, whose view was shared by Earl Loreburn, was that the Commissioners of Inland Revenue were entitled to find that the business was not exclusively carried on outside the United Kingdom when all the general financial arrangements were dealt with and controlled at meeting held from time to time at the offices of the company in England. Lord Parker said that ‘a trade or business cannot be said to be wholly carried on abroad if it be under the control and management of persons resident in the United Kingdom, although such persons act wholly through agents and messengers resident abroad. Where the brain which controls the operations from which the profits and gains arise is in this country, the trade or busines is, at any rate partly, carried on in this country.’
Earl Loreburn, Lord Parker, Lord Sumner
[1915] UKHL 2, [1915] AC 1022
England and Wales
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.265980
Procedure – application for late appeal – no good explanation – refused – evidence as expert – no – VAT – suppression of takings – best judgment – appeal dismissed – Income Tax – – best judgment – appeal dismissed – penalties – appeals allowed in part
[2020] UKFTT 455 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.656856
INCOME TAX – claim for repayment under UK-Bangladesh Double Tax Convention for five years – repayment for earliest year refused by HMRC on the basis that it was outside the statutory time limit – repayment of tax for later years reduced by tax said to be due for that earliest year – appeal on the basis that the Convention provided for a longer time limit and that HMRC should not have reduced the repayment – HMRC application for appeal to be struck out for lack of jurisdiction – held, application allowed in part and directions issued for the appeal to continue in part.
[2020] UKFTT 441 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.656872
Income Tax – late payment penalty Finance Act 2009 Schedule 56 – Self-Assessment – reasonable excuse – no – special reduction – no – appeal dismissed
[2014] UKFTT 68 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.521698
PAYE and NI. End of year filing. Reasonable excuse. Honest belief as reasonable excuse. R v Unah [2011] EWCA Crim 1837; [2012] 1 WLR 545 followed. Chichester v Commissioners of Revenue and Customs [2012] UKFTT 397 followed. David Wake Walker v HMRC [2012] UKFTT 717 followed. Coales v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2012] UKFTT 47 not followed. Burden of proof.
[2014] UKFTT 113 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.521697
Application to appeal out of time, for three assessments – undeclared rental income
[2014] UKFTT 75 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.521682
FTTTX Income tax – amendments to Appellant’s self-assessments for 2005-06 and 2006-07 – no business records supplied to support the figures in the Appellant’s original returns – significant extra deposits in bank accounts controlled by the Appellant explained as sale proceeds of motor vehicles ‘done up’ by the Appellant as a hobby and not as a trade – amendments proposed by HMRC (as reduced at the hearing) not arbitrary or capricious, being based on the amounts of the deposits – Appellant had not discharged the burden of showing the amendments were wrong – amendments (as so reduced) therefore upheld – associated penalties reduced because of extra 10% mitigation for ‘size and gravity’ arising from downward adjustment to the amendments proposed by HMRC at the hearing, but increased by 5% by Tribunal on grounds of lack of co-operation, net 5% reduction in applicable rate – appeal determined in principle on this basis, liberty to apply if necessary to determine final figures
[2014] UKFTT 78 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.521686
INCOME TAX – under-declaration – assessments of tax and penalties.
[2014] UKFTT 104 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.521677
FTTTx INCOME TAX -PAYE payments paid late on 10 occasions – andpound;5,841.89 late penalties due- appellant did not have a reasonable excuse for the failure – appeal dismissed
[2014] UKFTT 65 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.521687
INCOME TAX – PAYE audit – check of employer records – failure to comply with information notice – penalty – appeal against notice and penalty – was information required by notice reasonably required – yes – appeal dismissed – Schedule 36, Finance Act 2008
[2014] UKFTT 41 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.521674
FTTTx Paye – late lodging of employer’s annual return – agents believed return had been successfully filed – reminder and penalty notices issued – problems with third-party software – return still not filed – whether reasonable excuse – no – appeal dismissed
[2014] UKFTT 137 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.521679
INCOME TAX – Regulation 80 determination – P46 employment procedure – penalties – reasonable excuse – timely provision of information – appeal dismissed
[2014] UKFTT 71 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.521678
[2014] UKFTT 67 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.521693
Income Tax, Enquiry into Self Assessment Return; whether Return inaccurate; onus of proof; deductions from turnover; adequacy of Appellant’s books and records; whether records destroyed by flood; whether deductions claimed actually incurred; appeal dismissed.
[2012] UKFTT 123 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.451952
Penalty for late submission of P35 – return sent in ‘test’ mode – whether the return ‘delivered’ within the meaning of the PAYE Regulations – no – taxpayer’s genuine belief that return was delivered – whether reasonable excuse – yes – appeal allowed and penalty discharged
[2012] UKFTT 137 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.451970
PAYE – P35 return – Penalty for late return – Reasonable excuse – Appeal dismissed
[2014] UKFTT 145 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.521668
Default Surcharge – late payment of tax – suggestion caused by illness – no real evidence- no reasonable excuse – question whether penalty for following period disproportionate – jurisdiction – not disproportionate in sense of ‘not merely harsh but plainly unfair’ – appeal dismissed
[2012] UKFTT 136 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.451975
INCOME TAX – Surcharge on late payment of income tax (Taxes Management Act 1970 s.59C) – Appeal allowed
[2012] UKFTT 121 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.451974
Income Tax, Schedule E – Professional cricketer – Proceeds of benefit match – Whether profits of employment or gift.
[1927] UKHL TC – 11 – 625
England and Wales
Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.634147
Income Tax, Schedule D – Non-resident company – Exercise of trade within the United Kingdom-Income Tax Act, 1853 (16 and 17 Viet., c. 34), Section 2, Schedule D – Income Tax Act, 1842 (5 and 6 Viet., c. 35), Section 41-Finance (No. 2) Act, 1915 (5 and 6 Geo. V, c. 89), Section 31. U
[1927] UKHL TC – 13 – 91
England and Wales
Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.634151
Income Tax – Schedule A
[1896] UKHL TC – 3 – 491, [1896] AC 500, 3 TC 491
England and Wales
Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.634021
Income Tax – Schedule D
[1896] UKHL TC – 3 – 462
England and Wales
Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.634015
The imposition of the maximum penalty for failing to supply particulars was correct.
Times 19-Jan-1995
England and Wales
Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.89573
Interest runs from date of the original assessment despite a later change.
Ind Summary 25-Jul-1994
England and Wales
Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.86969
The thirty day time limit for the forwarding of a case stated is mandatory. The Court of Appeal has no discretion to extend the time limit. Millett LJ analysed the position by reference to the traditional dichotomy of directory or mandatory provisions, saying: ‘The question whether strict compliance with a statutory requirement is necessary has arisen again and again in the cases. The question is not whether the requirement should be complied with; of course it should: the question is what consequences should attend a failure to comply. The difficulty arises from the common practice of the legislature of stating that something ‘shall’ be done (which means that it ‘must’ be done) without stating what are to be the consequences if it is not done. The Court has dealt with the problem by devising a distinction between those requirements which are said to be ‘mandatory’ (or ‘imperative’ or ‘obligatory’) and those which are said to be merely ‘directory’ (a curious use of the word which in this context is taken as equivalent to ‘permissive’). Where the requirement is mandatory, it must be strictly complied with; failure to comply invalidates everything that follows. Where it is merely directory, it should still be complied with, and there may be sanctions for disobedience; but failure to comply does not invalidate what follows.’ and ‘The taxpayer’s argument, therefore, comes to this: that the requirement that the Case Stated be transmitted to the High Court is mandatory; but the requirement that this be done within thirty days is not. This is not an easy proposition to accept. Where statute requires an act to be done in a particular manner, it may be possible to regard the requirement that the act be done as mandatory but the requirement that it be done in a particular manner as merely directory. In such a case the statutory requirement can be treated as substantially complied with if the act is done in a manner which is not less satisfactory having regard to the purpose of the legislature in imposing the requirement. But that is not the case with a stipulation as to time. If the only time limit which is prescribed is not obligatory, there is no time limit at all. Doing an act late is not the equivalent of doing it in time . . This probably cannot be laid down as a universal rule, but in my judgment it must be the normal one. Unless the Court is given a power to extend the time, or some other and final mandatory time limit can be spelled out of the statute, a time limit cannot be relaxed without being dispensed with altogether; and it cannot be dispensed with altogether unless the substantive requirement itself can be dispensed with.’
Ind Summary 11-Jul-1994, Gazette 13-Jul-1994, Times 08-Jun-1994, [1994] 3 All ER 731, [1994] EWCA Civ 27, [1994] STC 689
Taxes Management Act 1970 56(4)
England and Wales
Cited – 7 Strathay Gardens Ltd v Pointstar Shipping and Finance Ltd and Another CA 15-Dec-2004
The tenants served a notice on the landlord to enfanchise their properties. The landlord’s counter-notice failed to state whether any estate management scheme existed. The tenants said the counter-notice was invalid.
Held: The landlord’s . .
Cited – JJB Sports Plc, Regina (On the Application of) v Telford and Wrekin Borough Council Admn 5-Nov-2008
The authority’s demand notice was served later than was practicable. The company now appealed against a liability order.
Held: The ratepayer’s appeal by way of Case Stated was dismissed. ‘demand notices must be served by the relevant authority . .
Cited – Matheson v Mazars Solutions Ltd EAT 16-Dec-2003
EAT Practice and Procedure – Application. The application had been presented timeously at the ET in Edinburgh, but was out of time when retransmitted to Glasgow. The tribunal had found the Edinburgh office to be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.84684
Shares are allotted to a person when that person acquires an unconditional right to be entered on a company’s register of members. The issue of shares only becomes complete after they are registered in the company’s books for the purposes of the BES scheme.
Lord Templeman said: ‘The Act of 1985 preserves the distinction in English law between an enforceable contract for the issue of shares (which contract is constituted by an allotment) and the issue of shares which is completed by registration. Allotment confers a right to be registered. Registration confers title. Without registration, an applicant is not the holder of a share or a member of the company: the share has not been issued to him . . No person can be a shareholder until he is registered. A person who is not a shareholder by registration cannot claim that the share has been issued to him . .’ and
‘A person who has been allotted shares is in as good a position in equity as a person to whom shares have been issued but that does not mean that there is no distinction between allotment and issue’ and
‘. . The certificate declares to all the world that the person who is named in it is the registered holder of certain shares in the company and that the shares are paid up to the extent therein mentioned . . ‘
HL Income Tax – Reliefs – Business expansion scheme – Relief precluded for a scheme involving loan facilities where shares issued on or after 16 March 1993 – Applications for shares processed, cheques presented for payment, allotments made, and applicants notified by that date, but registration in companies registers of members taking place later – Whether shares issued before 16 March – Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988, ss 289, 299A, 311(1) – Finance Act 1988, s 50.
Lord Templeman, Lord Lloyd of Berwick
Gazette 07-Sep-1994, Times 24-Jun-1994, Ind Summary 25-Jul-1994, [1994] 3 All ER 1, [1995] 1 AC 119, [1994] UKHL TC – 67 – 1
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 289 299A, Companies Act 1985 738
England and Wales
Appeal from – National Westminster Bank Plc and Another v Inland Revenue Commissioners CA 10-Jan-1994
Shares in Business Expansion Scheme were not to be treated as issued until they were entered in the company’s share register. The scheme was ineffective being a scheme to avoid Income Tax by financial manipulation. . .
At First Instance – National Westminster Bank Plc and Another and Barclays Bank Plc and Another v Inland Revenue Commissioners ChD 6-Aug-1993
A business expansion tax plan was valid if it was issued before the Income and Corporation Taxes Act. Shares were issued on the sending of the allotment letter, not when the shares came to be registered in the company’s books. . .
Cited – Bermuda Cablevision Limited and others v Colica Trust Company Limited PC 6-Oct-1997
(Bermuda) An alternative remedy to winding up is available to a shareholder where oppressive conduct is alleged, though the main thrust is that the conduct is unlawful. . .
Cited – Eckerle and Others v Wickeder Westfalenstahl Gmbh and Another ChD 23-Jan-2013
By acting together, two shareholders had first refused the proposed dividend, and replaced the board. They then acquired fiurther shares and achieved a majority of more than 75%, sufficient to pass a special resolution, and proposed the cancellation . .
Cited – Michael Wilson and Partners Ltd v Emmott ComC 8-Jun-2011
The claimant challenged an arbitration award made concerning the agreement under which the defendant had been admitted to partnership. MWP contended that the Tribunal were guilty of a large number of serious irregularities in their conduct of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.84207
The taxpayer sought to set off against tax some pounds 200,000 spent defending professional disciplinary proceedings. The House was asked whether this was ‘money wholly and exclusively laid out or expended for the purposes of the trade.’
Held: Where legal costs had been incurred in the defence of professional misconduct proceedings in order to protect the partnership’s ability to continue in practice, such costs were deductible against tax having been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the trade.
Lord Hoffmann, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, Lord Clyde, Lord Hutton Lord Hobhouse of Wood-borough
Times 18-Jun-1999, Gazette 07-Jul-1999, [1999] UKHL 6, [1999] 1 WLR 1333, [1999] 3 All ER 491
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 130(a)
England and Wales
Appeal From – David McKnight (Inspector of Taxes) v Sheppard CA 7-May-1997
Legal expenses incurred by a professional in defending disciplinary proceedings are deductible from taxable profits. . .
Cited – Mallalieu v Drummond HL 27-Jul-1983
The taxpayer was a barrister. To comply with Bar guidance on court dress, she wore, in court and in and to and from chambers black dresses, suits and shoes and white blouses. The clothing were perfectly ordinary articles suitable for everyday wear. . .
At first instance – McKnight (Inspector of Taxes) v Sheppard; Sheppard v McKnight ChD 21-May-1996
Legal costs and fines not deductible – insufficiently connected with trade. . .
Cited – Morgan v Tate and Lyle Ltd HL 1955
The words ‘for the purposes of the trade’ in the statute mean ‘for the purposes of enabling a person to carry on and earn profits in the trade’. Money spent for the purpose of preserving the trade from destruction can properly be treated as wholly . .
Cited – Inland Revenue Commissioners v Von Glehn CA 1920
The company had paid a penalty during the First World War under the Customs (War Powers) Act 1915 for exporting goods without taking all reasonable care to secure that the ultimate destination should not be enemy territory. They sought to set off . .
Cited – The Herald and Weekly Times Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation 21-Nov-1932
(High Court of Australia) The taxpayer newspaper sought to set off against its liability to income tax, sums which it had paid out in damages for defamation.
Held: They were deductible. Such claims against a newspaper are a ‘regular and almost . .
Cited – Edwards (Inspector of Taxes) v Bairstow HL 25-Jul-1955
The House was asked whether a particular transaction was ‘an adventure in the nature of trade’.
Held: Although the House accepted that this was ‘an inference of fact’, on the primary facts as found by the Commissioners ‘the true and only . .
Cited – Smith’s Potato Estates Ltd v Bolland (Inspector of Taxes) HL 1948
The taxpayer claimed to deduct the legal costs of contesting an assessment to tax. The dispute was about the computation of the taxpayer’s profits. It assumed that those profits were ascertainable, one way or another, at the time when the dispute . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.83555
Rules which disallowed exemption from tax for the transfer of assets abroad in order to avoid income tax do not apply where the taxpayer is not ordinarily resident here.
Times 16-Jul-1997, Gazette 23-Jul-1997, [1997] STC 995, [1997] UKHL TC – 70 – 57, [1997] UKHL 29, [1997] 1 WLR 1071
House of Lords, Bailii, Bailii
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 739
Appeal from – Inland Revenue Commissioners v Willoughby and Another CA 6-Jan-1995
Anti-avoidance provisions do not catch a transfer of assets which were located abroad and which made at a time when the taxpayer was a non UK resident. . .
Appealed to – Inland Revenue Commissioners v Willoughby and Another CA 6-Jan-1995
Anti-avoidance provisions do not catch a transfer of assets which were located abroad and which made at a time when the taxpayer was a non UK resident. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.82361
Retirement relief was to be given on the sale of a milking parlour and yard when accompanied by a cessation of the trade involving those assets.
Ind Summary 23-Jan-1995, Gazette 11-Jan-1995, Times 13-Dec-1994
England and Wales
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.82496
Where an employer has not deducted tax, the employee can be liable to a tax assessment. The recipient of Schedule E income can still be directly assessable.
HL Income Tax – Schedule E – Employment – Gain on sale of shares – Whether taxable under Schedule E – Whether purchaser liable to deduct tax under the Income Tax (Employments) Regulations 1973 SI 1973 No. 334 Regulation j-j 13 – Finance Act 1972, 5 79(1), Finance Act 1976, s 67(1).
Ind Summary 12-Jul-1993, Times 22-Jun-1993, Gazette 01-Sep-1993, [1993] UKHL TC – 66 – 29, [1993] 1 WLR 1090, [1993] STI 1007, [1993] 3 All ER 56, [1993] STC 436, 1993 SLT 916, 66 TC 29, 1993 SC (HL) 35
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970 209, Income Tax (Employments) Regulations 1973
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.82344
A scheme by which an employer paid bonuses to senior staff by purchasing contingent reversionary interests in an overseas trust, and then assigning them to the staff without admitting liability for income tax or national insurance contributions when the interests fell into possession. The scheme failed under anti-avoidance provisions under Ramsay principles. The cash payment received was a payment of assessable income under section 203(1) and consideration of later sections was unnecessary.
Times 03-May-2001, Gazette 24-May-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 455
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 203(1) 203B 203F
England and Wales
Cited – W T Ramsay Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 12-Mar-1981
The taxpayers used schemes to create allowable losses, and now appealed assessment to tax. The schemes involved a series of transactions none of which were a sham, but which had the effect of cancelling each other out.
Held: If the true nature . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.80145
The relief of foreign earnings given to those working as seafarers, did not apply to those working on a jack-up drilling rig with floating hull, and retractable legs., since this was not a ship. Being a seafarer involved the performance of duties on a ship. Definition in other acts suggested a vessel used in navigation. These rigs were without propulsion. Other decisions indicated the need for it to be used for navigation.
Times 03-May-2000, Gazette 11-May-2000
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 193 Sch 12
Appeal from – Perks and Others v Clark and Others CA 27-Jul-2001
Workers on North Sea drilling rigs which were capable of being moved, claimed relief as seafarers, since they were employed on a ship. The first instance court said the rigs were not ships. They appealed.
Held: The word ‘ship’ is an ordinary . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.79200
The taxpayer had claimed tax relief for certain periods (approximately six years) when he was living abroad. The Crown appealed a decision of the commissioners discharging their assessment to tax.
Held: There is a distinction in law between the residence abroad and absence for the purposes of tax relief. The taxpayer can be resident, but absent abroad. For the purposes of the provisions of schedule E tax deductions on foreign earnings, the taxpayer should not be free to include periods when he was neither resident, nor ordinarily resident, when aggregating the qualifying period of absence. Whether someone was at any particular moment absent from the UK could only be answered in the context of the question. In this context that, must require the court to give to meaning of a qualifying period absence in the sense of not being physically present in the place of residence.
Hart J
Times 20-Dec-2000
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 193(1) Sch E
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.78919
The remission by the High Court of tax appeals to the general commissioner is a practical way of dealing with matters.
Times 24-Jan-1996, Ind Summary 19-Feb-1996
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 739
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.78928
FTTTx INCOME TAX – deductibility of travelling expenses – whether travel to a permanent workplace – sections 338 and 339 Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003- appeal dismissed
[2013] UKFTT 420 (TC)
Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 338 339
England and Wales
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.515226
FTTTx INCOME TAX – Construction industry scheme – penalty for late submission of return – whether there was a ‘reasonable excuse’ – no – whether there were ‘special circumstances’ – no
[2014] UKFTT 530 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.526845
FTTTx Income Tax – Section 59C Taxes Management Act 1970 – surcharges for late payment of tax – whether reasonable excuse – no – appeal disallowed
[2014] UKFTT 527 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.526871
FTTTx Income tax – trust – copyright royalties – direction not to distribute as income – whether accumulation of income – whether taxable at the rate applicable to trusts – Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988, s 686 – whether taxable at the trust rate – Income Tax Act 2007, s 479
[2013] UKFTT 436 (TC)
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 686, Income Tax Act 2007 479
England and Wales
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.515230
FTTTx INCOME TAX – Employment Income – PAYE and NIC – tax avoidance scheme – bonus -whether bonus of restricted securities under Ch 2 Part 7 ITEPA 2003 or whether excluded as ‘money’ under s420(5)(b) ITEPA 2003 – bonus excluded from Part 7 as ‘money’ – GAAR proposal and enactment irrelevant to interpretation of provision – change in law which required re-engineering of scheme mid-way through did not affect conclusion that there was a scheme to pay bonus in money as opposed to securities -Regulation 80 determinations and s8 decisions upheld – appeals dismissed
[2013] UKFTT 463 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.515211
FTTTx EMPLOYMENT OR SELF-EMPLOYMENT – entertainers on cruise lines – whether seafarers’ earnings deduction applies – no – whether HMRC letter relating to a different person creates a legitimate expectation that the same treatment will apply – no – discovery assessment – whether valid – yes – appeals dismissed
[2011] UKFTT 24 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.428214
FTTTx Income tax – Whether expenditure was incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of a trade – Identification of the trade – Appeal allowed in part – Section 34 Income Tax (Trading and Other Income) Act 2005
John Brooks TJ
[2011] UKFTT 526 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.449507
FTTTx INCOME TAX – INFORMATION NOTICE and ASSOCIATED PENALTY – Appellants failed to provide information and documents as required by Information Notices under schedule 36 Finance Act 2008 – Tribunal satisfied that the information and documents were reasonably required to complete their enquiries – No reasonable excuse for the penalty – Appeal dismissed
[2011] UKFTT 23 (TC)
England and Wales
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.428205
Maintenance payments which were made direct to a child were not ‘qualifying payments’ under the Act allowing them to be set off against the tax payer’s income tax liability.
Times 22-Dec-1997
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 347B(1)
Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78400