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 proof shoud not apply.
Mann J
[2008] EWHC 1687 (Ch), Times 20-Oct-2008, [2009] 1 WLR 398, [2008] STI 1748, [2008] STC 2880, [2009] Bus LR 134
Bailii
Taxes Management Act 1970 95(1)(a)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Han v Customs and Excise Commissioners CA 2001
. .
Cited by:
See Also – Khawaja 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 FTTTx – 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 . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 June 2021; Ref: scu.270959
