A tax clearance was properly withdrawn because of non-disclosure. There was no abuse by the Revenue.
Citations:
Times 22-Oct-1993
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Regina v Inland Revenue Commissioners, Ex Parte Matrix Securities Ltd CA 10-Nov-1993
The withdrawal of a scheme approval after non-disclosure by the taxpayer was not an abuse of power by the Commissioners. . .
At First Instance – Regina v Inland Revenue Commissioners Ex Parte Matrix Securities Ltd HL 14-Mar-1994
The applicant had obtained what it thought to be clearance from the Revenue for a complex scheme, whose effectiveness depended on whether investors would qualify for capital allowances. The Inspector initially gave a favourable assurance, but that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Taxes Management
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.86937
