Khawaja v HM Revenue and Customs: UTTC 12 Aug 2013

UTTC INCOME TAX – PENALTY – assessment based on suppressed takings of restaurant business – negligent return – standard of proof in penalty proceedings – Article 6, European Convention on Human Rights – whether appellant’s article 6 right to a public hearing within a reasonable time had been contravened – relevant period for assessing delay – whether delay had prejudiced appellant – whether First-tier Tribunal has power to reduce penalty on account of unreasonable delay – TMA 1970, s 100B – whether appellant had discharged the evidential burden to rebut the presumption under TMA, s 101 that the tax assessment was correct – whether on the evidence the First-tier Tribunal’s findings as to suppressed takings were capable of being upset – determination of amount of penalty
[2013] UKUT 353 (TCC), [2013] BTC 1995, [2013] STI 2886, [2014] STC 150
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromKhawaja v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 8-Mar-2012
FTTTx Income Tax – Penalties – Suppressed takings from Restaurant business reflected in concealed director’s remuneration – Negligent submission of incorrect Tax Returns – Abatement of penalty. . .
At FTTTxRevenue and Customs v Khawaja ChD 17-Jul-2008
The court considered the standard of proof required before the Commissioners when considering the application of penalties.
Held: When challenging the assessment of a penalty on a taxpayer, there was no reason why the normal civil standard of . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 June 2021; Ref: scu.521010