Bond v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax – High Income Child Benefit Charge): FTTTx 8 Sep 2020

High income child benefit charge – penalties for failure to notify – taxpayer not aware that child benefit was being paid to partner – taxpayer received letter from HMRC prior to tax years in question with information about the charge – held: no reasonable excuse for failure to notify – appeal dismissed

[2020] UKFTT 355 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 02 January 2022; Ref: scu.654099

Parkinson v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 14 Jul 2015

FTTTx Income Tax/Corporation Tax : Sub-Contractors In The Construction Industry – INCOME TAX – construction industry scheme – late filing of returns – penalties – proportionality of penalties – Commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs v Bosher applied – calculation of penalty – reasonable excuse – appeal allowed in part

[2015] UKFTT 342 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax, Construction

Updated: 02 January 2022; Ref: scu.550568

The Brain Disorders Research Limited Partnership, Hockin v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 2 Jul 2015

FTTTx Income Tax/Corporation Tax : Anti-Avoidance – Income Tax – Claim for capital allowances in respect of expenditure on scientific research – Scheme to claim the allowances for a substantially higher amount than that actually applied in undertaking such research – whether the partnership’s whole activity or any part of its activity constituted trading for tax purposes – whether if so, trading losses derived from capital allowances arose in a non-commercial venture – whether pre-payments of interest on two substantial borrowings were allowable – whether the amounts borrowed had been contributed to a partnership and applied wholly for trading purposes – whether ‘interest’ had actually been paid – whether relief was denied by section 787 Taxes Act 1988 – whether certain expenses were deductible – Both Appeals dismissed

[2015] UKFTT 325 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 02 January 2022; Ref: scu.550300

Norman v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 22 Jun 2015

FTTTx INCOME TAX – Further assessment to income tax on gain from exercise of share options – s 29 TMA 70 – whether discovery – yes – whether either of conditions in s 29(4) and (5) met – yes – income gain correctly calculated under Ch 5 Pt 7 ITEPA 2003 – yes – appeal dismissed. Whether Tribunal can give effect to consequential CGT issues – no – possible remedies examined.

[2015] UKFTT 303 (TC)
Bailii
Taxes Management Act 1970 70
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 02 January 2022; Ref: scu.550283

Barett v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 7 Jul 2015

FTTTX Income Tax/Corporation Tax : Sub-Contractors In The Construction Industry – INCOME TAX – construction industry scheme (CIS) – contractor failing to deduct tax on payments to sub-contractor – Income Tax (Construction Industry Scheme) Regulations 2005, regs 9 and 13 – TMA 1970, s 50(6) – penalties for failure to make CIS returns – TMA, s 98A, s 100, s 102 – extent of tribunal’s jurisdiction – whether taxpayer had reasonable excuse in respect of failure to make returns – s 118(2) – reliance on accountant

[2015] UKFTT 329 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax, Construction

Updated: 02 January 2022; Ref: scu.550291

Cleevely v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 9 Jul 2015

Income Tax/Corporation Tax : Appeal – Income tax – assessments and penalties – Appellant’s application for permission to appeal out of time and HMRC’s cross application to strike out both withdrawn following settlement in separate bankruptcy proceedings in the High Court

[2015] UKFTT 332 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 02 January 2022; Ref: scu.550293

Weiser v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 10 Aug 2012

Income tax – individual resident of Israel – claim for exemption under Art XI, UK/Israel double tax treaty – whether UK pension income exempted from tax under special Israel tax provision was entitled to treaty exemption from UK tax under Art XI – meaning of ‘subject to Israel tax in respect thereof’

[2012] UKFTT 499 (TC), [2012] STI 3238, 15 ITL Rep 157, [2012] SFTD 1381
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 02 January 2022; Ref: scu.466138

Rangos v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 2 Jun 2015

FTTTx INCOME TAX – PAYE – appeal against a direction notice requiring the appellant to pay income tax and interest in respect of untaxed remuneration which HMRC alleged he had received as a shadow director – whether Appellant was shadow director and employee – yes – whether Appellant discharged burden of proving that he did not receive payments – no – whether companies wilfully failed to deduct tax from the payments to Appellant and did he know of that failure at the time – yes – appeal dismissed

[2015] UKFTT 262 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.549549

Merlin Scientific Llp v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 4 Jun 2015

FTTTx VAT – input tax- whether part in respect of supply of corporate meeting services disallowable on basis of an apportionment to business entertainment – ss 24 to 26 VATA 1994 – Article 5 VAT (Input Tax) Order 1992
INCOME TAX – whether costs described as being for corporate meeting services disallowable as business entertaining – ss 34 and 45 ITTOIA 2005

[2015] UKFTT 247 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

VAT, Income Tax

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.549543

Healy v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 28 May 2015

FTTTx INCOME TAX – deductions for accommodation – whether wholly and exclusively incurred for the purposes of the profession of actor – appeal dismissed – PROCEDURE – Upper Tribunal setting aside decision of FTT on appeal by HMRC and remitting case to FTT for fresh hearing – Whether at fresh hearing Appellant can challenge findings in the first FTT decision against which HMRC did not appeal and the Appellant did not cross-appea

[2015] UKFTT 233 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.549505

Savva and Others v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 25 Mar 2015

INCOME TAX – fixed rate notes stripped of interest coupons – whether difference between purchase price of stripped note and redemption value a ‘discount’ within Schedule D Case III or ITTOIA s 369 – yes – whether notes ‘deeply discounted securities’ – no – appeal dismissed

[2015] UKUT 141 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.549083

Healey v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 25 Mar 2015

INCOME TAX – floating rate notes stripped of intermediate interest coupons – whether difference between purchase price when coupons stripped and sale price when remaining coupons to redemption re-attached a capital or income gain – income – whether a ‘discount’ within Schedule D Case III – yes – appeal dismissed

[2015] UKUT 140 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.549074

Revenue and Customs v Hamilton and Kinneil (Archerfield) Ltd and Others: UTTC 20 Mar 2015

INCOME TAX /CORPORATION TAX – Losses – interpretation of s118ZC ICTA 1988 limit on loss relief for members of LLPs – whether appellant’s third share in capital of LLP was ‘contributed’ as capital (s118ZC(3) ICTA) on basis that this was the amount appellant had exposed to risk- no – whether appellant’s third share was included in amount the appellant was ‘liable to contribute’ to the assets of the LLP in the event LLP was wound up (s118Z(4)(a) ICTA) – no – appeal from Tax Chamber allowed

[2015] UKUT 130 (TCC), [2015] BTC 512, [2015] STC 1852
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.549079

Macklin v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 4 Feb 2015

INCOME TAX – UK-USA double tax agreement – whether pension income from the World Bank’s retirement scheme was eligible for relief from UK income tax as income from a ‘pension scheme established in’ the USA for the purposes of the agreement – articles 3(1)(o) and 17(1)(b) of the agreement

[2015] UKUT 39 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.549069

Bains v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax – High Income Child Benefit Charge): FTTTx 8 Sep 2020

Income tax – high income child benefit charge – penalties for failure to notify – taxpayer not aware that he had to notify or that his wife was claiming child benefit – taxpayer received letter from HMRC with information about the charge three months before birth of first child – held: no reasonable excuse for failure to notify – appeal dismissed

[2020] UKFTT 356 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.654098

Salmon v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax : Fixed and Daily Penalties for Failure To File A Self-Assessment Return On Time): FTTTx 17 Aug 2020

Schedule 55 Finance Act 2009 – fixed and daily penalties for failure to file a self-assessment return on time – illness and personal problems – whether taxpayer had a reasonable excuse for his default – appeal dismissed.

[2020] UKFTT 333 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.654096

Cooper v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 3 Jan 2019

(Income Tax/Corporation Tax : Appeal) INCOME TAX – penalty for a failure to take, within the time allowed, the necessary corrective action following the receipt of a follower notice – application for permission to give late notice of appeal to the First-tier Tribunal – permission denied

[2019] UKFTT 7 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.632689

Wilkinson v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax – Compensation Paid To A Person Carrying On A Property Rental Business): FTTTx 11 Sep 2020

Compensation paid to a person carrying on a property rental business for an interest rate swap mis-sold to him – whether the basic part of the compensation payable to him was taxable as income (because it was paid as compensation for revenue expenditure under the swap) or capital (because it was paid as compensation for the capital asset which would have been acquired by him instead if the swap had not been acquired) – held that the former was the case – whether the remaining part of the compensation payable to him, which was described as interest, was properly interest so called and taxable as such – yes

[2020] UKFTT 362 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.654115

Maciejewski v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax/Corporation Tax : Penalty): FTTTx 19 Dec 2018

Income tax – fixed and daily penalties for late filing of self-assessment returns for four years – application for permission to appeal out of time – Appellant had suffered family and financial problems necessitating returns to his native Poland -whether reasonable excuse continuing throughout default period – no – appeal dismissed

[2018] UKFTT 754 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.632456

Stokes v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax – Penalties for Failure To Make Returns): FTTTx 8 Sep 2020

Penalties for failure to make returns – appellants provided information to their accountant late – accountant was not attending to client matters due to his father’s illness and death – held: reasonable excuse for late-filing post-date of provision of information to accountant – decision not to reduce for special circumstances flawed – it was right to reduce because of special circumstances in respect of period prior to provision of information by appellants to accountant – penalties cancelled

[2020] UKFTT 357 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.654113

Wisdom v Chamberlain (Inspector of Taxes): CA 8 Nov 1968

The taxpayer, a comic actor, bought silver bullion hoping it would act as a hedge against a possible deflation of the pound. The revenue sought to tax his profits on sale under Schedule D. He argued that the money, being from one transaction, did not arise in the course of trade. The judge had reversed the Commissioners decision and found it not to be taxable.
Held: The revenue appeal succeeded: ‘supposing it was a hedge against devaluation, it was nevertheless a transaction entered into on a short-term basis for the purpose of making a profit out of the purchase and sale of a commodity, and if that is not an adventure in the nature of trade I do not really know what is. The whole object of the transaction was to make a profit.’ ‘because it was a hedge against devaluation it was not a trading adventure’ In this case: ‘it would have been possible for the commissioners to come to the view at which they did arrive in favour of the Crown or they might have taken a view of the facts in favour of the taxpayer. On the whole (not that it matters) I think that in the circumstances of this case I should have been inclined to agree with the view taken by the commissioners. With great respect to the learned judge, it is in my opinion impossible to say that the view expressed by the commissioners was not a view at which any reasonable tribunal could arrive.’ and ‘I for my part cannot see that it is any the less a trading adventure because one describes it as something to offset the loss incurred by a fall in the value of sterling, or as a ‘hedge’, or insurance, against devaluation.’

Harman and Salmon LJJ, and Cairns J
[1969] 1 All ER 332, [1969] 1 WLR 275, [1969] 45 Tax Cas 92, [1969] 47 ATC 358, [1968] TR 345
Income Tax Act 1952 Sch D Case 1
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal FromWisdom v Chamberlain (Inspector of Taxes) ChD 1968
Mr Wisdom, a famous comic actor, bought silver bullion, fearing the devaluation of the pound. He sold it at considerable profit. The commissioners found that that this was trading for profit.
Held: The Inspector’s appeal succeeded. The bullion . .
CitedJenkinson (Inspector of Taxes) v Freedland 1961
The court considered whether the purchase and sale of an item making a profit must count as acting in the course of trade so as to cause liability to income tax. Donovan LJ: ‘It cannot be right, therefore, to assert, as the Crown did before us, that . .
CitedEdwards (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 . .
MentionedLeeming v Jones (Inspector of Taxes) HL 1930
The case established the principle that the profit from a single transaction of a purchase and sale of property was taxable only if it amounts to a trade and if not does not fall within Case VI. The making of a profit on an isolated transaction of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.235903

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Livingston: 1927

Lord Clyde said: ‘I think the test, which must be used to determine whether a venture such as we are now considering is or is not, ‘in the nature of trade’, is whether the operations involved in it are of the same kind, and carried on in the same way, as those which are characteristic of ordinary trading in the line of business in which the venture was made.’

Lord Clyde
(1927) 11 Tax Cas 538
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedLeeming v Jones (Inspector of Taxes) HL 1930
The case established the principle that the profit from a single transaction of a purchase and sale of property was taxable only if it amounts to a trade and if not does not fall within Case VI. The making of a profit on an isolated transaction of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.235906

Leeming v Jones (Inspector of Taxes): HL 1930

The case established the principle that the profit from a single transaction of a purchase and sale of property was taxable only if it amounts to a trade and if not does not fall within Case VI. The making of a profit on an isolated transaction of purchase and resale does not become income merely because the asset was acquired with the intention of selling at an increased value.
Viscount Dunedin said: ‘The limitations of the words ‘profits and gains’ were pointed out by Blackburn J. long ago in the case of Attorney-General v. Black, when he said that profits and gains in Case VI. must mean profits and gains ejusdem generis with the profits and gains specified in the preceding five Cases. And then there came the memorable and often quoted words of Lord Macnaghten in the London County Council case, when he begged to remind people ‘that income tax is a tax on income.’ The only question, therefore, here was – Was there in any sense income?’ and ‘The fact that a man does not mean to hold an investment may be an item of evidence tending to show whether he is carrying on a trade or concern in the nature of trade in respect of his investments, but per se it leads to no conclusion whatever.’
Lord Buckmaster discounted the suggestion that a profit made on the sale of an asset acquired in the expectation that it would rise in value (and presumably result in a realized gain) is income. To him all that was involved in such a case was the realization of a capital asset.

Viscount Dunedin, Lord Buckmaster
[1930] 1 KB 279, [1930] 15 Tax Cas 333, 15 Tax Cas 333, [1930] AC 415
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedInland Revenue Commissioners v Livingston 1927
Lord Clyde said: ‘I think the test, which must be used to determine whether a venture such as we are now considering is or is not, ‘in the nature of trade’, is whether the operations involved in it are of the same kind, and carried on in the same . .

Cited by:
MentionedWisdom v Chamberlain (Inspector of Taxes) CA 8-Nov-1968
The taxpayer, a comic actor, bought silver bullion hoping it would act as a hedge against a possible deflation of the pound. The revenue sought to tax his profits on sale under Schedule D. He argued that the money, being from one transaction, did . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax, Capital Gains Tax

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.235905

Pepper v Serious Organised Crime Agency: FTTTx 11 Oct 2013

FTTTX INCOME TAX – preliminary issues – assumption of revenue functions by SOCA – civil recovery proceedings under Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 – compromise agreement – whether compromise extended to tax liabilities – whether assessments otherwise invalid by reason of abuse of process

[2013] UKFTT 654 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 31 December 2021; Ref: scu.518595

Ross v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax/Corporation Tax : Penalty): FTTTx 12 May 2015

FTTTx Penalties – Section 98A (2) and (3) Taxes Management Act 1970 – Employer’s End of Year return P35 late for 2010, 2011 and 2012 – whether reasonable excuse – no – application for permission out of time appeal – not allowed

[2015] UKFTT 210 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: scu.547416

A v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax / Corporation Tax : Employment Income): FTTTx 5 May 2015

FTTTx INCOME TAX – Employment income – whether payment made pursuant to a compromise agreement by employer to its employee taxable as ‘earnings’ under s62 ITEPA – no- payment non-taxable as it was made in respect of potential race discrimination claim – appeal against HMRC’s amendment to appellant’s self-assessment allowed in principle
Careless inaccuracy penalty – taxable redundancy amounts not included on return – appeal dismissed

[2015] UKFTT 189 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: scu.547410

Jackson v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax/Corporation Tax : Assessment/Self-Assessment): FTTTx 13 May 2015

FTTTx INCOME TAX: alleged suppression of takings – cash takings inconsistent with debit/credit card receipts – assessments to additional income tax/NIC – evidence adduced at the hearing as to particular features of the Appellant’s business (limousine hire); appeal allowed.

[2015] UKFTT 221 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: scu.547403

Swallow v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 7 Oct 2010

INCOME TAX – Applications by HMRC for a stay in the appeal proceedings, initially for six months, and an extension of time to serve their Statement of Case – both applications opposed by the Appellant – Criminal investigation being undertaken into whether offences had been committed in relation to the submission of tax returns to HMRC by persons (such as the Appellant) who set up trades pursuant to a marketed tax avoidance scheme involving environmental research – the Appellant not suspected by HMRC of having committed any criminal offence – the investigation focussing on ‘the architects, facilitators and advisers to the arrangements’ – held a stay of the appeal proceedings for a period of 6 months and also an extension of time for the service of the Statement of Case would be directed – balancing exercise undertaken – reason for directing the stay and the extension of time was to give time for the Officers of HMRC having conduct of the appeal to be provided with further relevant evidence (if any) gathered or to be gathered in the criminal investigation – held however that HMRC had failed to discharge the burden on them of showing that the conduct of the appeal up to and including the hearing and the subsequent release of the Tribunal’s decision would necessarily give rise to a real risk of prejudice which may lead to injustice to a defendant or the prosecution in criminal proceedings – appeal re-allocated to the category of Complex cases under rule 23(3) of the 2009 Rules

[2010] UKFTT 481 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: scu.426647

O’Connor v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax – High Income Child Benefit Charge): FTTTx 8 Sep 2020

Income tax – high income child benefit charge – penalty for failure to notify – appellant unaware of the charge as was living in Australia for ten years up to 2015 – his wife made child benefit claim and did not convey information about the charge on the form to the appellant – held: there was a reasonable excuse for failure to notify – penalty cancelled

[2020] UKFTT 354 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 29 December 2021; Ref: scu.654111

Huntley v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax/Corporation Tax : Assessment/Self-Assessment): FTTTx 20 Dec 2018

INCOME TAX – taxpayer who received notices to file but failed to file tax returns assessed under s 29 TMA (discovery assessments) – taxpayer’s appeal against assessments unsuccessful – in meantime taxpayer filing tax returns covering same years – HMRC refusing to accept or process tax returns – purported appeal against that decision – whether Tribunal has jurisdiction – no

[2018] UKFTT 760 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 29 December 2021; Ref: scu.632452

Coman v Governors of Rotunda Hospital: HL 13 May 1920

The respondents owned the Rotunda Hospital and certain attached property known as the Rotunda Rooms and Vaults, from the letting of which, provided with light and heat and the necessary furniture, they derived the revenue which the appellant sought to assess under Schedule D of the Income Tax Acts. The respondents claimed that these profits were included in the assessment under Schedule A, and were therefore exempt from taxation under Schedule D. Held that the respondents carried on ‘an adventure or concern in the nature of trade’ which was assessable under Schedule D.
Grove v. Young Men’s Christian Association, 4 Tax Cas. 613; Religious Tract and Book Society of Scotland v. Forbes, 33 S.L.R. 289, 23 R. 390, 3 Tax Cas. 415; and Carlisle and Silloth Golf Club v. Smith, 1913, 2 K.B. 75, approved and followed.
Maugham v. Free Church of Scotland, 30 S.L.R. 666, 3 Tax Cas. 297, distinguished.

Lord Chancellor (Birkenhead), Lords Finlay, Cave, Atkinson, and Shaw
[1920] UKHL TC – 7 – 517, [1920] UKHL 633, 58 SLR 633, [1921] 1 AC 1
Bailii, Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 29 December 2021; Ref: scu.631524

Mathew v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 31 Mar 2015

FTTTx INCOME TAX -appeals against Schedule 36 Notices – whether to stay the case – whether appeals made to HMRC – what are statutory records – whether burden of proof is on HMRC – Schedule 36 Notices varied – closure notice applications – whether HMRC has reasonable grounds for not issuing closure notices – held, yes

[2013] UKFTT 430 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 29 December 2021; Ref: scu.545098

Dyson v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 19 Mar 2015

FTTTx INCOME TAX – appellant not representative partner – whether has a right of appeal against penalties for late filing – daily penalties charged – reference to Upper Tribunal decision in Donaldson – whether breach of Article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights – held, no right of appeal – appeal struck out

[2015] UKFTT 131 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 29 December 2021; Ref: scu.544621

Senex Investments Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 4 Mar 2015

FTTTx CAPITAL ALLOWANCES – Business Premises Renovation Allowance – whether a former Church was a Qualifying Building as last been used for the purposes of a trade, profession or vocation – yes – whether a Vestry used as an office [whether or not for the purposes of a trade, profession or vocation] – yes. Capital Allowances Act 2001 Section 360C – Appeal allowed.

[2015] UKFTT 107 (TC)
Bailii
Capital Allowances Act 2001
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 December 2021; Ref: scu.544595

Bluu Solutions Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 20 Feb 2015

FTTTx INCOME TAX – penalty for late payment of in-month PAYE – whether HMRC had advised of the risk of penalties – whether the case was ‘criminal’ under the European Convention on Human Rights – whether the company had a reasonable excuse – the scope of HMRC’s discretion to consider special circumstances – whether it must be exercised before the tribunal hearing – Agar, Algarve Granite and Morgan and Donaldson considered – whether penalties of andpound;74,418.09 disproportionate – whether FA 2013 amendment to penalty provisions means original regime was disproportionate – Bank Mellat v HM Treasury and Total Technology considered and applied – appeal dismissed.

[2015] UKFTT 95 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 December 2021; Ref: scu.544567

Ali v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax/Corporation Tax : Penalty): FTTTx 17 Dec 2018

Income tax – Schedule 55 Finance Act 2009 – fixed and daily penalties for failure to file self-assessment return on time – penalties for failure to pay tax on time – Appellant was caring for his wife – his solicitors had not filed the return as instructed and had not provided the information he needed for him to file the return – five month delay – whether reasonable excuse – no – appeal dismissed

[2018] UKFTT 738 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 December 2021; Ref: scu.632424

Coomber (Surveyor of Taxes) v Berkshire Justices: HL 3 Dec 1883

The central issue was whether a block of buildings comprising county assize courts and a police station were liable to income tax under Schedule A. If they had been erected as part of the function of government in the administration of justice, then notwithstanding the fact that they were built by the county and paid for out of the county rates, the Crown’s exemption from payment of taxes would apply.
Held: They were both exempt, the police being ultimately a crown responsibility
Lord Blackburn said: ‘I do not think it can be disputed that the administration of justice, both criminal and civil, and the preservation of order and prevention of crime by means of what is now called police, are among the most important functions of Government, nor that by the constitution of this country, these functions do, of common right, belong to the Crown.
In England a subject may have a franchise, giving him the right to administer justice in a particular locality in courts held by him; and he may also have a right to name the constables. In early times, such local franchises were of value for the revenue derived from the fees, and, no doubt, as increasing the local influence of the grantee. But it was always held that on a proceeding in quo warranto the Crown could call on the person in possession of such a franchise to shew his title, on the ground that they were among the matters quae mere spectant ad regem, and that unless he shewed a title by grant from the crown, or by prescription, the franchises were seized and he was ousted. (See Comyn’s Digest, Quo Warranto A, and the authorities there collected). In the present case there is no question raised as to any franchise in the hands of a subject.
From very early times, judges acting under the King’s Commission went down to administer justice in counties. The sheriff, the head officer of the county, but appointed by the Crown, was always called upon to attend them, and to provide lodging and accommodation for them. He did this at the cost of the county. I do not stop to inquire by what machinery the cost was in early times defrayed. It is now provided for by the statutes referred to, and comes out of the county rate.
The sheriff also was bound to raise the hue and cry, and call out the posse comitatus of the county whenever it was necessary for any police purposes; in so doing he was acting for the Crown, but the burthen fell on the inhabitants of the county. By modern legislation, the county police are arrayed at the expense of the county, defrayed by a police rate on the county, supplemented, in some cases, by grants from the imperial revenues.
Income Tax. Assize courts and police stations. Crown privilege. In fulfilment of the duty cast upon a county of providing courts and maintaining a police force, the justices cause certain buildings to be erected and used for the purposes of an assize court and police station. Held, that the purposes for which the buildings are owned and occupied are purposes required and created by the Government of the country, and that the buildings must be deemed to be for the use and service of the Crown, and, therefore, exempt from income tax.

Lord Blackburn
[1883] 9 AC 61, [1883] UKHL TC – 2 – 1, (1883) 9 App Cas 61
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex Parte Northumbria Police Authority CA 18-Nov-1987
The Authority appealed from refusal of judicial review of a circular issued by the respondent as to the supply of Plastic Baton Rounds and CS gas from central resources only. The authority suggested that the circular amounted to permission for the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Constitutional, Income Tax

Updated: 28 December 2021; Ref: scu.636770

Latilla v Inland Revenue (No 2) ;, Latilla Campbell v Inland Revenue, Mayo v Inland Revenue: HL 14 Dec 1950

HL Surtax – Undistributed income of company – Appeal against apportionments of income remitted by High Court to Special Commissioners for further consideration-Right of appeal against amended apportionments – Income apportioned to married woman – Whether assessable on husband – Finance Act, 1922 (12 and 13 Geo. V c. 17), Section 21 and First Schedule; Finance Act, 1927 (17 and 18 Geo. V, c. 10), Section 31; Income Tax Act, 1918 (8 and 9 Geo. V, c. 40), Section 133 and General Rules, Rule 16; Finance Act 1936 (26 Geo. V and 1 Edw. VIII, c. 34), Section 19 (5).

[1950] UKHL TC – 32 – 159, 32 TC 159
Bailii
Finance Act 1922 21
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 December 2021; Ref: scu.560167

Poole v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 16 Feb 2015

FTTTx Income tax – incorrect returns – HMRC amendments to self-assessment return in respect of profits of self-employment and capital gains – whether HMRC had incorrectly disallowed expenditure – on the facts, no – whether assessment correctly calculated – yes – whether penalties correctly assessed – yes – appeal dismissed

Connell TJ
[2015] UKFTT 78 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 December 2021; Ref: scu.543223

North v The Commissioners Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 3 Feb 2015

FTTTx CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY SCHEME – late filing of returns – incorrect returns – Appellant’s spouse dealt with returns but had been unwell – whether reasonable excuse – on the facts no – whether special circumstances – no – hardship considered – appeal not allowed

[2015] UKFTT 56 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax, Construction

Updated: 28 December 2021; Ref: scu.543221

Higgins v The National Crime Agency: FTTTx 29 Jan 2015

FTTTx INCOME TAX – discovery assessment – effect of Confiscation Order – Confiscation Order assessed on a gross basis – included a proportion of tax liability – discovery assessment not disputed – assessment reduced to prevent double recovery in relation to tax included in Confiscation Order – additional liability not disproportionate – appeal allowed in part.

[2015] UKFTT 46 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 December 2021; Ref: scu.543200

Wojtowycz v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 27 Jan 2015

FTTTx INCOME TAX – self – assessment return – andpound;100 late filing penalty – paragraph 3 Schedule 55 FA 2009 – Appellant in PAYE system – underpayment of tax – whether a reasonable excuse for late filing – no -whether special circumstances – appeal dismissed

[2015] UKFTT 45 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 December 2021; Ref: scu.543202

Arnfield v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 3 Feb 2015

FTTTx INCOME TAX- penalty for late filing of self-assessment return- paragraph 3 Schedule 55 FA 2009 – whether reasonable excuse – no – whether special circumstances – no evidence that special circumstances considered on review – HMRC decision flawed – penalty reduced

[2015] UKFTT 53 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 December 2021; Ref: scu.543206

Ali v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 6 Feb 2015

FTTTx INCOME TAX – PAYE – underpayment of income taxed at source caused by error in PAYE coding – car benefits not taxed – HMRC seeking underpaid tax by means of self-assessment return – ESC A19 – whether First-tier Tribunal has jurisdiction to consider discretionary concession – no – Appeal struck out

[2015] UKFTT 67 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 December 2021; Ref: scu.543204

Eclipse Film Partners No 35 Llp v HM Revenue and Customs: CA 17 Feb 2015

Appeal against closure notice.

Sir Terence Etherton Ch, Christopher Clarke, Vos LJJ
[2015] EWCA Civ 95
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
See AlsoEclipse Film Partners No 35 Llp v Revenue and Customs SCIT 17-Feb-2009
SCIT Closure notice – application for direction to close enquiry into tax return – limited liability partnership – s 28B Taxes Management Act 1970 – direction for closure within three months . .
See AlsoEclipse Film Partners No. 35 Llp v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 22-Sep-2010
FTTTx INCOME TAX – Applications by the parties for further directions – whether departure by HMRC unilaterally from the timetable for preparation for the appeal set down in agreed directions, causing additional . .
See AlsoEclipse Film Partners No 35 Llp v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 22-Jun-2011
FTTTx Expert evidence – application for a direction to exclude expert evidence – whether expert evidence inadmissible on grounds that it is an opinion as to UK tax and therefore trespasses on the special . .
See AlsoEclipse Film Partners No 35 Llp v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 20-Apr-2012
FTTTx Income tax – limited liability partnership acquired licence to film rights and sub-licensed rights to distributor – complex financing arrangements involving loans to members of the partnership and . .
At UTTCHM Revenue and Customs v Eclipse Film Partners No35 Llp UTTC 22-Mar-2013
UTTC Procedure – costs – whether, in a case where the taxpayer has opted out of the Complex costs regime, the First-tier Tribunal has the power to order that the parties share the costs of the appellant complying . .
See AlsoEclipse Film Partners No 35 Llp v Revenue and Customs CA 26-Feb-2014
The court was asked whether the First-Tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) had jurisdiction to make an order that the costs of preparing hearing bundles for a substantive appeal by the appellant taxpayer should be shared equally between the taxpayer and the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax

Updated: 28 December 2021; Ref: scu.542929

Allan v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 23 Jan 2015

Unapproved pension scheme – assessment raised on employee pursuant to s. 386 Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 in respect of a contribution of assets by his employer – whether s.386 arguably to be construed as inapplicable by reason of rule of construction in s.3 Human Rights Act 1998, on basis that assessment would otherwise infringe Article 1 of Protocol 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights -no – whether decision of Court of Appeal in Irving v HMRC [2008] EWCA Civ 6 was per incuriam – whether First-tier Tribunal entitled to strike out appeal under rule 8(3)(c) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009 – yes: decision of First-tier Tribunal upheld

[2015] UKUT 16 (TCC), [2015] BTC 502, [2015] STC 890
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542299

White v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 19 Jan 2015

FTTTX Income tax – Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 (ITEPA) 2003 Part 3 – Earnings and benefits treated as earnings – whether Appellant could offset claimed but unproven credit balance on directors loan account – no – Appeal dismissed

[2015] UKFTT 21 (TC)
Bailii
Income Tax (Earnings & Pensions) Act 2003
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542052

Roberts v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 19 Jan 2015

FTTTX Income tax – Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 (ITEPA) 2003 Part 3 – Earnings and benefits treated as earnings – whether Appellant could offset claimed but unproven credit balance on directors loan account – no – Appeal dismissed

[2015] UKFTT 22 (TC)
Bailii
Income Tax (Earnings & Pensions) Act 2003
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542045

Farrow v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 20 Jan 2015

FTTTX CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY SCHEME – late filing of returns – Section 98A Taxes Management Act – Schedule 55 to the Finance Act 2009 – whether penalties unfair or disproportionate – principles set down in Bosher applied – appeal not allowed

[2015] UKFTT 28 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Construction, Income Tax

Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.542033

KLS Electrical Contracting v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 6 Jan 2015

FTTTX Income tax – inaccuracies in tax returns over a period of eight years – overstated travelling and subsistence expenses – whether Revenue Amendments correct – yes – Penalty assessment – whether errors in returns were careless – yes – Appeal dismissed – penalties confirmed

[2015] UKFTT 4 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.541509

Osbourne v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 6 Jan 2015

FTTTx Income tax – closure notices, discovery assessments and penalty – errors in Appellant’s tax returns – whether Appellant had provided evidence to displace HMRC’s figures in closure notices and assessments – no – whether error due to carelessness on the part of the Appellant – yes – appeal dismissed and penalties confirmed

[2015] UKFTT 3 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.541511

Patel v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 9 Jan 2015

FTTTx INCOME TAX – loss relief – section 66 Income Tax Act 2007 – whether trades carried on on a commercial basis – whether trades carried on with a view to the realisation of profits – no – appeal allowed by consent in relation to two tax years where assessments were out of time – otherwise appeal dismissed

[2015] UKFTT 13 (TC)
Bailii
Income Tax Act 2007 66
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.541513

Barclays Bank Limited v Inland Revenue Commissioners: HL 1960

A testator did have the control of a company within section 55(1) of the 1940 Act, by virtue of the fact that he held shares as an individual in his own right and also was entitled to vote as a trustee for a further allocation of shares (making together more than half the total of the issued ordinary shares).

[1961] AC 509, (1960) 2 All ER 817
Finance Act 1940 55(1)
England and Wales
Cited by:
DistinguishedBermuda 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. . .
CitedG v G and Another FdNI 25-Oct-2003
There had been a long but argumentative marriage, and the parties disputed distribution of the assets on an ancillary relief application.
Held: The husband could not claim to discount shareholdings as a minority shareholding where he also . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax, Company

Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.221573

Rohac, Personal Representative of v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax/Corporation Tax : Exemptions and Reliefs): FTTTx 14 Dec 2018

INCOME TAX – self assessment – subcontractor’s expenses claim – whether expenses incurred wholly and exclusively for purposes of trade – appeal dismissed other than for accountancy expenses

[2018] UKFTT 736 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.632473

Reb Moishe Foundation v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax – Charity): FTTTx 21 Jul 2020

Income Tax – Charity – whether or not loan to company was an approved charitable investment – whether loan for the benefit of the charity and not for the avoidance of tax – determination of amount of non-allowable expenditure – whether or not FTT has full appellate jurisdiction or merely supervisory jurisdiction – held that loan was for the benefit of the charity but also for the avoidance of tax – held that the amount of non-allowable expenditure should be determined by reference to payments made in tax year – held that FTT’s jurisdiction was merely supervisory as regards HMRC’s decision but that HMRC’s decision was not unreasonable in principle but had determined the amount of non-allowable expenditure wrongly – appeal allowed in part

[2020] UKFTT 303 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax, Charity

Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.653144