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 delay in bringing the appeal on for hearing to the detriment of partners in the Appellant who had an interest in the outcome of the appeal, made it appropriate for the Tribunal to exercise its discretion to curtail further disclosure requested by HMRC and to refuse to make certain other directions which the Appellant submitted would, if made, lead to further delay – held although HMRC’s departure from the agreed timetable was a subject for criticism, the additional delay was not, in all the special circumstances of the case, sufficient to outweigh the requirement in the interests of justice and fairness for full disclosure – further directions made
Citations:
[2010] UKFTT 448 (TC)
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Eclipse 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 . .
Cited by:
See Also – Eclipse 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 Also – Eclipse 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 . .
See Also – HM 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 Also – Eclipse 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 . .
See Also – Eclipse Film Partners No 35 Llp v HM Revenue and Customs CA 17-Feb-2015
Appeal against closure notice. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Taxes Management, Income Tax
Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.426570