Category: Taxes Management

Lawton (T/A C B Lawton Drywall and Plastering Contractors) v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 15 Oct 2010

Sub-contractors in the construction industry – Contractors’ returns – Income Tax (Sub-contractors in the Construction Industry) Regulations 1993 – late submission of return – sections 98A and 118 Taxes Management Act 1970 – amendment to section 98A from 6th April 2007 – reasonable excuse

[2010] UKFTT 507 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.426626

Thoyab Halal Meat Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Procedure : Other): FTTTx 10 Dec 2018

Procedure – late application to set aside and/or for full findings of fact and reasons – treated as out of time application for full findings of facts and reasons and/or out of time application for set aside of original decision – Martland v HMRC applied – applications dismissed

[2018] UKFTT 713 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.632483

Lynch v National Crime Agency: FTTTx 9 Dec 2014

FTTTx INCOME TAX – Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 – whether qualifying condition met for NCA to carry out general Revenue functions in relation to Appellant – yes – discovery assessments under s 29 TMA 1970 – whether the conditions for such assessments met – yes – whether within time limits – yes – on evidence, no basis on which assessed amounts to be adjusted, other than one to be reduced to nil – with latter exception, assessments confirmed – appeal dismissed

[2014] UKFTT 1088 (TC)
Bailii
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, Taxes Management Act 1970 29
England and Wales

Income Tax, Taxes Management

Updated: 24 December 2021; Ref: scu.540317

General Healthcare Group Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 9 Dec 2014

FTTTx PROCEDURE – lead case direction – rule 18, Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009 -direction for disposal of related case under rule 18(5) – whether facts of related case materially different from those in lead case – scope of jurisdiction of tribunal under rule 18(5)

[2014] UKFTT 1087 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 24 December 2021; Ref: scu.540299

Clavis Liberty Fund 1 Lp (Acting Through D J Cowen) v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 2 Dec 2014

FTTTx PROCEDURE – witness summons issued – application for summons to be set aside – whether Tribunal had jurisdiction to issue them – whether summons should be set aside due to lack of full and frank disclosure – summons set aside

[2014] UKFTT 1077 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 24 December 2021; Ref: scu.540296

Lucky Dev v Sweden: ECHR 27 Nov 2014

ECHR Article 4 of Protocol No. 7
Right not to be tried or punished twice
Continuation of tax-surcharge proceedings after taxpayer’s acquittal of tax offence arising out of same facts: violation
Facts – In June 2004 the Swedish tax authorities instituted proceedings against the applicant in respect of her income tax and VAT returns for 2002 and ordered her to pay additional tax and surcharges. The applicant challenged that order in the courts. She was also prosecuted for bookkeeping and tax offences arising out of the same set of tax returns. Although she was convicted of the bookkeeping offence, she was acquitted of the tax offence (for want of the requisite intent). The tax proceedings continued for a further nine and a half months after the date her acquittal became final. In her application to the European Court, the applicant complained that as a result of being prosecuted and ordered to pay tax surcharges in respect of the same events, she had been tried and punished twice, in breach of Article 4 of Protocol No. 7.
Law – Article 4 of Protocol no. 7
(a) Admissibility: In three recent decisions, including Shibendra Dev v. Sweden (7362/10, 21 October 2014 – see Article 35 – 1 above, page XX), the Court had ruled that new remedies that had become available in the domestic law as a result of recent rulings of the Swedish Supreme Court concerning liability to both prosecution and tax surcharges could now be considered effective and had to be exhausted in any case in which the set of proceedings which commenced later in time ended on or after 10 February 2009. Since the second set of proceedings (the criminal proceedings in the applicant’s case) had ended before that date, the applicant had not been required to use that remedy.
(b) Merits: The Court reiterated that proceedings involving tax surcharges were to be considered ‘criminal’ not only for the purposes of Article 6 of the Convention but also for the purposes of Article 4 of Protocol No. 7. Thus, both the tax and the criminal proceedings in the applicant’s case came under the ambit of the latter provision.
Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 prohibited the prosecution or trial of a second ‘offence’ in so far as it arose from identical facts or facts which were substantially the same. The elements of the bookkeeping offence were sufficiently separate from the facts that had given rise to the tax surcharges as to enable the Court to conclude that the applicant’s conviction of that offence had not amounted to double punishment. The position regarding his prosecution for the tax offence was, however, different: the applicant’s indictment and the imposition of tax surcharges were based on the same failure to declare business proceeds and VAT while the tax proceedings and the criminal proceedings concerned the same period of time and essentially the same amount of evaded taxes. Accordingly, the facts were at least substantially the same.
The requirement of a ‘final’ decision had been met in as much as no appeal had been lodged against the decision acquitting the applicant of the tax charge, which had thus acquired legal force.
As to whether there had been duplication of the proceedings, the Court reiterated that Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 was not confined to the right not to be punished twice but extended to the right not to be tried twice for the same offence. It thus applied even where the individual was prosecuted in proceedings that did not result in a conviction. However, the protection only operated once a decision concerning the same offence was final: Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 did not preclude several concurrent sets of proceedings being conducted before that final decision was issued. A violation would occur, however, if one set of proceedings continued after the date on which the other set was concluded with a final decision. The tax proceedings in the applicant’s case were not terminated and the tax surcharges were not quashed after the criminal proceedings became final but instead had continued for a further nine and a half months. There had not been a sufficiently close connection, in substance and in time, between the two sets of proceedings for them to be viewed as part of the same set of sanctions (contrast the position in cases such as R.T. v. Switzerland and Nilsson v. Sweden, in which the Court found that decisions on withdrawal of a driving licence were directly based on an expected or final conviction for a traffic offence and thus did not contain a separate examination of the offence or conduct at issue).
In sum, the applicant had thus been tried ‘again’ for an offence for which she had already been finally acquitted.
Conclusion: violation (unanimously).
Article 41: EUR 2,000 euros in respect of non-pecuniary damage.

7356/10 – Legal Summary, [2014] ECHR 1389
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights

Human Rights, Taxes Management

Updated: 24 December 2021; Ref: scu.540004

Fidex Limited v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 13 Nov 2014

Procedure – appeal against closure notice – reliance on grounds for amendment not stated in closure notice – Tower McCashback considered Corporation tax – loan relationships – application of paragraph 13 Sch9 FA 1996 to debit arising under para19A

[2014] UKUT 454 (TCC)
Bailii
Finance Act 1996
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal From – Fidex Ltd v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 2-Apr-2013
FTTTx CORPORATION TAX – loan relationships – debit under paragraph 19A, Schedule 9, Finance Act 1996 in respect of the difference in the accounting value of loan relationships on a change of accounting practice – . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – Fidex Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 21-Apr-2016
‘This appeal is concerned with a tax avoidance scheme called Project Zephyr. The object of this scheme was to create a loss of around 84 million Euros in the hands of the appellant (‘Fidex’) which would be available for group relief throughout the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Corporation Tax, Taxes Management

Updated: 24 December 2021; Ref: scu.539408

Wrottesley v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 21 Oct 2014

FTTTx PROCEDURE – Application for preliminary hearing – Appeal against determinations issued on basis that that appellant domiciled in England and Wales – Whether determination of appellant’s domicile of origin should be heard as a preliminary issue – No – Application dismissed

[2014] UKFTT 972 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 23 December 2021; Ref: scu.539006

Mustafa (T/A Orsi Deli Foods) v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 20 Oct 2014

FTTTx PROCEDURE – application to set aside decision of VAT and Duties Tribunal on ground that Applicant was not given notice of and did not attend hearing – Rules of the VAT and Duties Tribunal, rules 19(1) and 26(3) – application refused

[2014] UKFTT 975 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 23 December 2021; Ref: scu.538990

Brown v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 24 Oct 2014

FTTTx Costs – s10 Tribunal Procedure Rules 2009 – whether Appellant entitled to an order for costs on the basis that HMRC had acted unreasonably in defending an appeal by the Appellant against the imposition of a penalty for late payment of income tax – the Tribunal having found on the facts that the Appellant had reasonable cause to believe that a time to pay arrangement had been agreed – no – application dismissed

[2014] UKFTT 984 (TC)
Bailii
Tribunal Procedure Rules 2009 10
England and Wales

Taxes Management, Costs

Updated: 23 December 2021; Ref: scu.538981

Palmiero v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 29 Sep 2014

FTTTx Procedure – application for extension of time to apply for set-aside of Tribunal’s decision, some two and a half years after its date of issue – set aside application weak – Data Select principles applied – application for extension of time refused

[2014] UKFTT 922 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.537263

Archer v Revenue and Customs (Validity of Surcharge Notices Under Section 59C TMA – Notice Not Sent To Taxpayer): FTTTx 8 Jul 2020

Validity of surcharge notices under Section 59C TMA – notice not sent to taxpayer, was replacement valid – yes – was notice of additional first surcharge valid – yes – whether judicial review of bankruptcy threat where closure notices claimed to be invalid gave rise to reasonable excuse and if so was there unreasonable delay after excuse ceased.

[2020] UKFTT 288 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.652735

Chinn v Hochstrasser (Inspector of Taxes): HL 11 Dec 1980

The House considered the meaning of the word ‘bounty’ in an income tax context, where it had been used by the courts: ‘My Lords, I would venture to point out that the word ‘bounty’ appears nowhere in the statute. It is a judicial gloss upon the statute descriptive of those classes of cases which are caught by the section in contrast to those which are not. The courts must, I think, be extremely careful not to interpret this descriptive word too rigidly . . What the cases have sought to do is to distinguish between those cases where the recipient has in return for that benefit which he has received accepted some obligation which he has to perform, either before receiving the benefit or at some stated time thereafter, and those cases where the recipient benefits without any assumption by him of any correlative obligation.’
HL Capital gains tax – Avoidance – Foreign trustees – Appointment to beneficiary of interest in shares contingent on survivalfor three days – Immediate sale by him to foreign company coupled with contract to repurchase shares on fourth day – Whether scheme effective to avoid apportionment of gain to beneficiary – Finance Act 1965 (c 25), ss 25(3) and 42(2) and Sch 7, para 13(1).
The House was considering whether an emolument could be said to arise ‘from’ a taxpayer’s employment or office, Lord Radcliffe cited various judicial statements and stated: ‘These are all glosses, and they are all of value as illustrating the idea which is expressed by the words of the statute. But it is perhaps worth observing that they do not displace those words’.

Lord Roskill, Lord Radcliffe
[1981] 1 All ER 189, [1981] AC 533, [1980] UKHL TC – 54 – 311, [1981] 2 WLR 14, 54 TC 311, [1980] TR 467, [1981] STC 1
Bailii
Finance Act 1965 25(3) 42(2)
England and Wales
Citing:
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 by:
Applied – 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 – Jones v Michael Vincent Garnett (HM Inspector of Taxes) CA 15-Dec-2005
Husband and wife had been shareholders in a company, the wife being recorded as company secretary. The company paid dividenceds to both. The husband appealed a decision that the payment to his wife was by way of a settlement and was taxable in his . .
Cited – Butler v Wildin 1988
Two brothers acquired a company and were the sole directors. 19 shares each were acquired by the children with their own money. Two later born children also acquired 19 shares therein with their own money from their respective fathers and others, . .
Cited – Jones v Garnett (Her Majesty’s Inspector of Taxes) HL 25-Jul-2007
The husband and wife had each owned a share in a company which sold the services of the husband. The Revenue claimed that the payment of dividends to the wife was a settlement.
Held: The Revenue failed. The share had been transferred to the . .
Cited – Shop Direct Group v Revenue and Customs SC 17-Feb-2016
The Court considered the interpretation of the sections which applied corporation tax to post-cessation receipts. Companies had received from the Inland Revenue substantial repayments of VAT together with interest. There had been reorganisations of . .
Cited – RFC 2012 Plc (Formerly The Rangers Football Club Plc) v Advocate General for Scotland SC 5-Jul-2017
The Court was asked whether an employee’s remuneration is taxable as his or her emoluments or earnings when it is paid to a third party in circumstances in which the employee had no prior entitlement to receive it himself or herself.
Held: The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management, Income Tax, Capital Gains Tax

Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.559790

Millenium Energy Trading Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 10 Sep 2014

FTTTx LATE APPEAL – application to appeal out of time – ongoing correspondence between HMRC and Appellant’s representative – should time limit be extended – Leeds City Council, McCarthy and Stone considered – extension of time allowed

[2014] UKFTT 884 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.536750

Stella Rosa (Contractors) Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 16 Sep 2014

FTTTx Penalty – late payment of PAYE and NICs – FA 2009, Schedule 56 – whether an insufficiency of funds was a reasonable excuse for late payment – no – whether any special circumstances existed to justify a reduction in the penalty amount – no – whether the penalty was disproportionate – no – appeal dismissed

[2014] UKFTT 898 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.536754

Tradium Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 12 Sep 2014

FTTTx PROCEDURE – whether time for service of witness statement should be extended – no – whether appeal should be struck out under Rule 8(3)(a) of Tribunal Rules – inadequate explanation for non-compliance, future compliance unlikely, prospects of success considered weak – appeal struck out

[2014] UKFTT 894 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.536757

Collinson v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 13 Apr 2010

FTTTx PROCEDURE – Self Assessment Return – Notice of Enquiry given in 2001- Closure Notice applied for more than eight years after enquiry opened – Whether reasonable grounds for not issuing closure notice shown by HMRC?- No – Direction to issue Closure Notice granted

[2010] UKFTT 165 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.422171

Sentricare East Mids Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 2 Sep 2014

FTTTx Employer’s Annual Return P35 – failure to file by due date – company changed name during tax year – HMRC software unable to accept change of name – return ultimately filed using old company name – P60s issued to staff with old company name – no reasonable excuse

[2014] UKFTT 857 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management, Income Tax

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.536416

Refina Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 2 Sep 2014

FTTTx Employer’s annual return form P11D(b) – failure to file by due date – filing attempted before due date – no acknowledgment – employer should have been alerted by lack of acknowledgment – filing electronically since 2005 – no reasonable excuse

[2014] UKFTT 860 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management, Income Tax

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.536415

Chen v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 27 Aug 2014

FTTTx INCOME TAX – Notice of Appeal – late appeal; application to make appeal out of time; reasons for lateness; reliance on third-party accountant; discretion of the tribunal; the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009, as amended, Rules 5(3)(a), and 20(4); application refused.

[2014] UKFTT 848 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management, Income Tax

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.536399

Skelly and Others v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 16 May 2014

FTTTx PROCEDURE – Information Notices approved by the Tribunal – Paragraph 3 Schedule 3 Finance Act 2008 – application to set aside approval – jurisdiction – whether procedural irregularity – Rules 19, 38 Tribunal Rules – applications refused

[2014] UKFTT 478 (TC)
Bailii
Finance Act 2008 S3P3

Taxes Management

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.536395

Groves v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 2 Sep 2014

FTTTx Income Tax – Trust and Estate Tax Return filed late – appellant advised HMRC no income anticipated – no subsequent correspondence – paper return filed 40 days after due date showing estate wound up during tax year – no reasonable excuse

[2014] UKFTT 858 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management, Income Tax

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.536411

Thompson and Another v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 20 Aug 2014

FTTTx PROCEDURE – application by HMRC to strike out the proceedings – whether agreement under s 54 TMA 1970 to settle the appeals – examination of evidence – whether evidence sufficient to establish agreement – held, yes – application granted.

[2014] UKFTT 826 (TC)
Bailii
Taxes Management Act 1970 54
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.536046

Hambleton Play Group v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 19 Aug 2014

FTTTx Return Form P35 – late filing penalty – appeal lodged over two years after first penalty notice – change of personnel – late appeal allowed – reasonable excuse for delay – two subsequent returns filed before due date and before late Return filed- appeal rejected as no reasonable excuse for extended delay

[2014] UKFTT 815 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.536038

Nantyffyllon Rugby Club v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 20 Aug 2014

FTTTx Section 98A (2) and (3) Taxes Management Act 1970 – penalties for late employer’s end of year P35 return – Appellant believed reasonable care taken – no failure message received- whether reasonable excuse – no – appeal dismissed

[2014] UKFTT 827 (TC)
Bailii
Taxes Management Act 1970 98A(2) 98A(3)
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.536040

Acorn Accountancy and Taxation Services Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 13 Aug 2014

FTTTx Penalty for late online filing of Employer’s Annual Return – Appellant asserted that return filed – HMRC’s records showed that correlation ID matched a return by an associated company – no correlation ID had been issued to Appellant – whether return filed – no – whether reasonable excuse for default – no – appeal dismissed

[2014] UKFTT 795 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.535950

Awdry v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 11 Aug 2014

FTTTx Penalty of andpound;1200 for late online filing of Employer’s Annual Return – Appellant assumed penalties related to PAYE payments which in fact were paid up to date and that penalties had been issued in error – whether reasonable excuse – yes for part of period – appeal part allowed

[2014] UKFTT 791 (TC)
Bailii

Taxes Management

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.535953

Laithwaite v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 6 Aug 2014

FTTTx CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY SCHEME -penalties under Schedule 24 Finance Act 2007 of andpound;41.13 – penalty under Section 98A (4) Taxes Management Act 1970 andpound;140 and andpound;7200 – failure to make scheme returns – incorrect assessment raised -appellant had reasonable excuse and penalty not proportional – appeal allowed

[2014] UKFTT 759 (TC)
Bailii
Taxes Management Act 1970 98A

Taxes Management

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.535812

Falconwood Employment Agency Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 4 Aug 2014

FTTTx INCOME TAX – Penalties – late payment of PAYE and NICs – Schedule 56 Finance Act 2009 – whether reasonable excuse due to insufficiency of funds – no- whether penalty unfair – no – whether penalty disproportionate – no.

[2014] UKFTT 757 (TC)
Bailii

Taxes Management, Income Tax

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.535803

Hughes v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 1 Aug 2014

Penalties – imposed for failure to comply with direction made pursuant to Schedule 36 Finance Act 2008 to produce documents – documents said not to exist – it is unlikely that this is correct – appeal against fixed penalty dismissed – appeal against the imposition of daily penalty dismissed but amount of daily penalties reduced

[2014] UKFTT 747 (TC)
Bailii
Finance Act 2008 Sch 36
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.535806

Elder v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 30 Jul 2014

FTTTx PROCEDURE – categorisation of appeals – application of Rule 11 (appointing and giving notice of appointment of a representative) to the respondents – failure to provide a statement of case on time – application to bar respondents from taking further part in the proceedings – failure to help the tribunal to further the overriding objective – costs sanction

[2014] UKFTT 728 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 20 December 2021; Ref: scu.535783

Pawlowski (Collector of Taxes) v Dunnington: CA 5 May 1999

Whether a taxpayer may invoke a public law defence to a claim for collection of taxes.
Held: Where the Board of Inland Revenue had concluded that an employee had knowingly received his income without deduction of PAYE, the ability to challenge that finding was no bar to a later defence on the basis that no evidence of such knowledge existed.

Simon Brown LJ, Aldous LJ, Mantell LJ
Times 13-May-1999, Gazette 26-May-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 3020, [1999] STC 550, [1999] BTC 175, (1999) 11 Admin LR 565
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 18 December 2021; Ref: scu.268837

Letts v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 22 Jul 2014

Costs — s 29 Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 — Tribunal Procedure Rule 10 — Refusal by HMRC of Appellant’s request to call two named HMRC officials as witnesses — Whether HMRC thereby ‘acted unreasonably in . . defending . . the proceedings’ — In the circumstances of the case, no — Application for costs dismissed

[2014] UKFTT 709 (TC)
Bailii
Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 29

Taxes Management, Costs

Updated: 18 December 2021; Ref: scu.535339

First Class Communications Ltd v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 28 May 2014

CASE MANAGEMENT – whether First-tier Tribunal erred in law in allowing evidence from appeal to be admitted in later appeal by same appellant and directing that appeals be consolidated – no – appeal dismissed

[2014] UKUT 244 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management, Evidence

Updated: 17 December 2021; Ref: scu.534508

Thomas and Another v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 27 Jun 2014

FTTTx PROCEDURE – application that HMRC be debarred from taking part in these proceedings – effect of s 54 TMA agreement in relation to prior tax year – whether HMRC precluded from arguing a particular issue in relation to later year by virtue of a contract with the appellants – whether as a matter of public law HMRC should be so precluded – jurisdiction of the Tribunal

Roger Berner J
[2014] UKFTT 640 (TC)
Bailii

Taxes Management

Updated: 16 December 2021; Ref: scu.533714

EJ Parkinson and Son Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 24 Jun 2014

FTTTx PENALTY for late submission of a monthly return required under the Hydrocarbon Oils (Registered Dealers in Controlled Oil) Regulations 2002 – whether the appellant had a reasonable excuse for the late submission – found that the return had been posted to HMRC more than 3 weeks before the due date although it was not received by HMRC – a reasonable excuse found to have been established – appeal allowed

John Walters QC TJ
[2014] UKFTT 627 (TC)
Bailii
Hydrocarbon Oils (Registered Dealers in Controlled Oil) Regulations 2002

Taxes – Other, Taxes Management

Updated: 16 December 2021; Ref: scu.533694

Schuldenfrei v Hilton (Inspector of Taxes): ChD 25 Feb 1998

A taxpayer’s inactive acquiescence in an inspector’s mistaken acceptance did not create an agreement which could restrain correction of the error.

Times 25-Feb-1998
Taxes Management Act 1970 54
England and Wales
Citing:
Appealed to – Schuldenfrei v Hilton (Her Majesty’s Inspector of Taxes) CA 16-Jul-1999
Where an inspector issued an assessment to tax, but mistakenly completed it to say that no tax was payable, and the taxpayer did nothing to indicate reliance upon it, there was no agreement between the taxpayer and the inspector such as would . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – Schuldenfrei v Hilton (Her Majesty’s Inspector of Taxes) CA 16-Jul-1999
Where an inspector issued an assessment to tax, but mistakenly completed it to say that no tax was payable, and the taxpayer did nothing to indicate reliance upon it, there was no agreement between the taxpayer and the inspector such as would . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Capital Gains Tax, Taxes Management

Updated: 13 December 2021; Ref: scu.89052

Parmar and others (trading as Ace Knitwear) v Woods (Inspector of Taxes): ChD 30 May 2002

The taxpayers had been represented by a professional accountant, but incompetently. They sought leave to renew the appeal on the basis that the representation had been poor.
Held: The chartered accountant had a statutory right of audience. His fitness and expertise was warranted and assumed. No breach of natural justice had occurred. His incompetence in fact was a matter for his professional body, and a renewed hearing, save in one aspect, was not allowed.

Lightman J
Gazette 11-Jul-2002
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Parmar (T/A Ace Knitwear) v Inspector of Taxes SCIT 14-Aug-2001
INCOME TAX – partnership – whether a loss was incurred in the year ending on 31 December 1991 – no – whether the disposal value of machinery and plant destroyed by fire in 1991 exceeded the capital expenditure incurred in the provision of that . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management, Natural Justice

Updated: 11 December 2021; Ref: scu.174320

Houghton v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 28 Nov 2013

FTTTx MONEY LAUNDERING REGULATIONS – penalty for failure to register – whether HMRC were precluded from issuing a penalty – whether the penalty structure is effective, proportionate and dissuasive – whether the penalty levied on the Appellant was appropriate – appeal dismissed and penalty confirmed.

[2013] UKFTT 716 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 10 December 2021; Ref: scu.519606

Clark (Inspector of Taxes) v Oceanic Contractors Inc: HL 16 Dec 1982

HL Income tax, Schedule E – Non-resident employer – Employees working in U.K. sector of North Sea – Whether employer liable to deduct tax from emoluments – Income Tax (Employments) Regulations 1973 – Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970, s 181 and s 204 – Finance Act 1973, 5 38 – Continental Shelf Act 1964 – A foreign company which was not resident in, but maintained places of business within the United Kingdom, engaged personnel (United Kingdom residents and others) to work on barges and other vessels in the United Kingdom sector and other sectors of the North Sea. The employees were paid in U.S. dollars by cheques drawn in Brussels on a New York bank account. Cheques might be (a) deposited in a bank designated by the employee, (b) seat to any person designated by the employee or (c) delivered to the employee himself on his barge or vessel.
The House considered the principle of statutory interpretation that a statute should be confined to the territory within which it operates. Lord Wilberforce said: ‘That principle, which is really a rule of construction of statutes expressed in general terms, and which as James LJ said is a ‘broad principle’, requires an enquiry to be made as to the persons with respect to whom Parliament is presumed, in the particular case, to be legislating. Who, it is to be asked, is within the legislative grasp or intendment, of the statute under consideration?’ and
Lord Scarman said: ‘the general principle . . is simply that, unless the contrary is expressly enacted or is so plainly implied that the courts must give effect to it, United Kingdom legislation is applicable only to British subjects or to foreigners who by coming to the United Kingdom, whether for a short or a long time, have made themselves subject to British jurisdiction. Two points would seem to be clear: first, that the principle is a rule of construction only, and secondly, that it contemplates mere presence within the jurisdiction as sufficient to attract the application of British legislation.’
Whether and to what extent a law applies in relation to foreigners outside the jurisdiction depends upon who is ‘within the legislative grasp, or intendment’ of the relevant provision.

Lord Wilberforce, Lord Scarman
[1983] 2 AC 130, [1982] UKHL TC – 56 – 183
Bailii
Income Tax (Employments) Regulations 1973, Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970 181 204, Finance Act 1973 38, Continental Shelf Act 1964
England and Wales
Citing:
Approved – Ex parte Blain; In re Sawers CA 1-Aug-1879
Where legislation regulates the conduct of an individual, it may be so construed as to limit it to conduct by United Kingdom citizens anywhere.
James LJ referred to ‘broad, general, universal principle that English legislation, unless the . .

Cited by:
Cited – Serco Ltd v Lawson and Foreign and Commonwealth Office CA 23-Jan-2004
The applicant had been employed to provide services to RAF in the Ascension Islands. He alleged constructive dismissal. There was an issue as to whether somebody working in the Ascension Islands was protected by the 1996 Act. The restriction on . .
Cited – Gaudiya Mission and others v Brahmachary CA 30-Jul-1997
The High Court had found the plaintiff to be a charity, and ordered the Attorney-General to be joined in. The A-G appealed that order saying that the plaintiff was not a charity within the 1993 Act. The charity sought to spread the Vaishnava . .
Cited – Serco Ltd v Lawson; Botham v Ministry of Defence; Crofts and others v Veta Limited HL 26-Jan-2006
Mr Lawson was employed by Serco as a security supervisor at the British RAF base on Ascension Island, which is a dependency of the British Overseas Territory of St Helena. Mr Botham was employed as a youth worker at various Ministry of Defence . .
Cited – Agassi v Her Majesty’s Inspector of Taxes HL 17-May-2006
The tax payer played tennis and was paid sums for when he played in England. The sums were paid to his overseas based company.
Held: The revenue’s appeal succeeded. The ‘legislative intendment in relation to sections 555 and 556, and their . .
Cited – Office of Fair Trading v Lloyds TSB Bank PlC and Others HL 31-Oct-2007
The House was asked whether the liability of a credit card company under the 1974 Act applied where the contract was performed abroad and subject to foreign law.
Held: The principle which disapplied an English statute in an extra-territorial . .
Mentioned – Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and Others HL 30-Jul-2009
The claimant sought to enforce a judgment debt against a foreign resident company, and for this purpose to examine or have examined a director who lived abroad. The defendant said that the rules gave no such power and they did, the power was outside . .
Cited – Cox v Ergo Versicherung Ag SC 2-Apr-2014
The deceased army officer serving in Germany died while cycling when hit by a driver insured under German law. His widow, the claimant, being domiciled in England brought her action here, claiming for bereavement and loss of dependency. The Court . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Jurisdiction, Taxes Management, Income Tax

Updated: 10 December 2021; Ref: scu.192277

Howes v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 11 Jun 2014

FTTTx Income tax – Penalties under s 59C Taxes Management Act 1970 and Schedule 56 Finance Act 2009 for late payment of income tax – Appellant believed that a time to pay arrangement that had been agreed for tax due in the previous year continued and covered tax due in the following tax year – whether reasonable excuse – no – appeal disallowed

[2014] UKFTT 598 (TC)
Bailii

Income Tax, Taxes Management

Updated: 05 December 2021; Ref: scu.526924

Figg v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 16 Jun 2014

FTTTx INCOME TAX – relocation benefits – no change in residence due to cessation of employment – does relief apply – penalties and surcharges for late payment of income tax and late filing of tax returns – section 271 ITEPA 2003 – s59C and s93 TMA 1970

[2014] UKFTT 578 (TC)
Bailii
Taxes Management Act 1970 59C 93

Income Tax, Taxes Management

Updated: 05 December 2021; Ref: scu.526918

Whitefields Golf Club Ltd and Others v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 13 May 2014

FTTTx Information notices under schedule 36 FA08 – appeal against issue of taxpayer notices – HMRC seeking copies of old documents which had been previously provided by taxpayers but destroyed by HMRC – long hiatus in HMRC’s investigation of VAT restructuring of golfing activities – in spite of unfortunate history, documents were reasonably required and it was appropriate to require their delivery – appeal dismissed subject to one variation to one of the notices

[2014] UKFTT 458 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 05 December 2021; Ref: scu.526893