INCOME TAX – underdeclaration of takings – inadequacy of records – whether declared takings and other income insufficient to cover bank deposits and cash expenditure – agreed errors – presumption of continuity – appeal allowed

[2014] UKFTT 357 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 03 December 2021; Ref: scu.525327

Late penalty imposed for late payment of tax – reasonable excuse – appeal dismissed and penalty upheld

[2014] UKFTT 341 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 03 December 2021; Ref: scu.525321

PAYE – late payment penalty – reasonable excuse – appeal dismissed

[2014] UKFTT 251 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 03 December 2021; Ref: scu.525272

PAYE – Late lodging of employer’s annual return – Late intimation of failure to submit returns for previous years – No penalty notices issued for previous years so no appeal- dispute over extent of telephone contact with HMRC – Whether reasonable excuse – Yes – Appeal allowed

[2014] UKFTT 286 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 03 December 2021; Ref: scu.525263

Income tax – Penalty under Schedule 56 Finance Act 2009 for late payment of income tax – Appellant had reason to believe a time to pay arrangement had been agreed – whether reasonable excuse – yes – appeal allowed.

[2014] UKFTT 208 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 03 December 2021; Ref: scu.525209

FTTTx INCOME TAX – self-employed flying instructor with office at home – travel between home and two airfields where he gave flying lessons – deductibility of travel expenses and telephone expenses – whether travel expenses incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of his self-employment – no – whether amounts assessed in relation to telephone expenses were excessive – no – whether discovery assessments were valid – yes – appeal dismissed

[2014] UKFTT 214 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 03 December 2021; Ref: scu.525240

Appela against rejection of appeal against order that tax saving scheme was ineffective.
Held: The Scheme fails on the points decided by the UT, and that Mr Barnes’s appeal against the terms of the closure notice issued by HMRC is unsuccessful.

MacFarlane, Vos LJJ, Sir Timothy Lloyd
[2014] EWCA Civ 31
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 29 November 2021; Ref: scu.520802

The annuities granted by a life assurance company were charged upon the whole funds of the company. Its income from interest on investments, dividends, and rents was very much larger than the amount of the annuities, and without this branch of income there would have been a deficit instead of a profit on a year’s trading. The income from interest, dividends, and rents was taxed at the source, and the income tax so paid was more than if the company had been assessed on nett profits under Schedule D. In paying the annuities the company deducted the amount of the income tax due in respect thereof, which it retained.
Held that the company was not bound to account to the Inland Revenue for the income tax so deducted

Lord Chancellor Loreburn, Lord Ashbourne, Lord Atkinson, and Lord Gorell
[1909] UKHL 94
Bailii
Scotland

Income Tax

Updated: 29 November 2021; Ref: scu.620598

Penalties – PAYE – late lodging of P35 – whether reasonable excuse – No – late Notice of Appeal – Sections 49, 98A, and 118 TMA – Appeal dismissed

[2013] UKFTT 708 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 28 November 2021; Ref: scu.519590

FTTTx INCOME TAX – PAYE – P35 annual return – electronic submission – whether HMRC’s email message amounted to confirmation of filing – no – no effective filing until after due date – penalty imposed – penalty confirmed
PROCEDURE – appropriate steps after receipt of summary decision – requirement to make request for full facts and findings before considering any possible further appeal
NATURE OF TRIBUNALS – independence from parties

[2013] UKFTT 553 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 22 November 2021; Ref: scu.516917

FTTTx INCOME TAX – penalty for late filing of Employer Annual return -was a lack of computer skills to do return online a reasonable excuse – no – appeal dismissed

[2013] UKFTT 533 (TC)
Bailii

Income Tax

Updated: 22 November 2021; Ref: scu.516901

FTTTx PAYE – late submission of Employer’s Annual Return – whether scale of penalty is reasonable, and whether penalty is unfair and should be reduced – Decision of Upper Tribunal in Hok Ltd applies. Whether reasonable excuse for late submission of return – Yes.

[2013] UKFTT 545 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 22 November 2021; Ref: scu.516892

FTTTx INCOME TAX – Penalty – late payment of PAYE and NICs – FA 2009, Schedule 56 – whether payments made in time – reasonable excuse for late payment – no – whether any special circumstances existed to justify a reduction in the penalty amount – no – appeal dismissed.

[2013] UKFTT 511 (TC)
Bailii

Income Tax

Updated: 21 November 2021; Ref: scu.516295

The court asked as a question of principle as to whether Parliament ever intended to allow capital expenditure to be deductible as an expense against income.
Held: ‘the expenditure is something which if you were looking at profits and gains under Schedule D would be deductible as a sum of money wholly and exclusively expended for the purpose of making profits and gains.’

Croom-Johnson J
(1949) 31 TC 266
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Camas Plc v HM Inspector of Taxes ChD 7-Jul-2003
An investment company sought to set against its liability to corporation tax, the various costs of taking over another company. They argued that as an investment company these were not costs of the purchase and could be set against tax.
Held: . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax

Updated: 17 November 2021; Ref: scu.184470

FTTTx INCOME TAX – PAYE – penalty for late payment – Schedule 56 Finance Act 2009 – reasonable excuse – appeal dismissed

[2013] UKFTT 363 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 17 November 2021; Ref: scu.513504

The court was asked whether the taxpayer dermatologist could deduct the expenses of attending educational courses, conferences and meetings, including associated costs of travel and accommodation.
Held: She could.
The defendant requested anonymisation of the judgment – the extent to which the identity of the parties has already been revealed goes to the questions of what rights to privacy they still have and how effective the order is likely to be in preserving them.

Henderson J
[2009] EWHC 62 (Ch), [2009] STC 1930, [2009] 3 All ER 915, [2010] 1 WLR 800, [2009] STI 1962, [2009] BTC 323
Bailii
Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 198
England and Wales
Cited by:
See Also – HM Revenue and Customs v Banerjee (1) ChD 19-Jun-2009
The taxpayer sought anonymity in the reporting of the case against her.
Held: No, she could not be given anonymity.
Henderson J said: ‘In determining whether it is necessary to hold a hearing in private, or to grant anonymity to a party, . .
Appeal from – HM Revenue and Customs v Banerjee CA 28-Jul-2010
The taxpayer doctor had claimed against her income tax, the costs of attending training courses required under her employment contract and for professional development. The Revenue appealed against a decision allowing the expenses.
Held: The . .
Cited – Money v AB ChD 10-Nov-2021
Anonymity – balance in favour of open justice
Ruling on an application by the Defendant for anonymity.
Held: Refused: ‘The mental health condition of the Defendant and the impact of the judgment on his family relationships are, therefore, relevant factors to take into account, but they do . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax

Updated: 17 November 2021; Ref: scu.347122

(Income Tax/Corporation Tax : Other) – INCOME TAX – Notice to taxpayer under Schedule 36 FA 2008 for private bank statements – appeal on grounds that all relevant information provided, private bank statements not being relevant – held private bank statements reasonably required by HMRC for checking taxpayer’s tax position – appeal dismissed.

[2017] UKFTT 628 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 12 November 2021; Ref: scu.592634

Income Tax: redundancy payment: earlier payment as compensation for variation of contractual redundancy arrangements

[2010] UKUT 431 (TCC), [2011] STC 394, [2011] BTC 1511, [2011] STI 131
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.428182

UTTC Income tax – EIS relief – section 291B of ICTA – ‘Connected person’ – condition concerning loan capital – whether loan capital and share capital to be aggregated – whether share capital to be taken at nominal value or subscribed value

[2010] UKUT 417 (TCC), [2011] STI 258, [2011] STC 126, [2011] BTC 1501
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.428179

Taxpayer’s relience on professional adviser

FTTTx Income tax. Carlessness. Reasonable excuse. Reliance on a professional advisor. Wald v HMRC [2011] UKFTT 183 (TC) not followed. AB v HMRC [2007] STC (SCD) 99 followed and explained. No carelessness where taxpayer unaware of advisor’s carelessness/negligence – when advisor acts in a truly professional capacity and not as a mere functionary.

[2013] UKFTT 657 (TC), [2014] SFTD 504, [2014] WTLR 293, [2014] STI 588
Bailii
England and Wales

Income Tax

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.518593

FTTTx INCOME TAX – PENALTY FOR LATE FILING OF RETURN – Whether Appellant had reasonable excuse for default – No – Appeal dismissed.
[2012] UKFTT 22 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 27 October 2021; Ref: scu.450839

A partner’s share of the profits of a foreign partnership, are to be treated as income from a foreign possession
(1889) 14 App Cas 493
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Anson v Revenue and Customs SC 1-Jul-2015
Interpretation of Double Taxation Agreements
This appeal is concerned with the interpretation and application of a double taxation agreement between the United Kingdom and the United States of America. A had been a member of an LLP in Delaware, and he was resident within the UK, but not . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 October 2021; Ref: scu.573165

UK taxes had not been paid by the overseas company paying a dividend, but had been by the UK companies in which it held shares. The dividends received by the taxpayer were preference dividends rather than ordinary dividends, and were therefore paid at a fixed rate, undiminished by the taxes paid by the UK companies.
Held: The taxpayer had been correctly assessed on the full amount of the dividend.
Notwithstanding the concept of ‘franked’ dividend income, the income received by the shareholder was not the same income as that of the company.
Lord Wright explained: ‘The English company is taxed on the balance of its profits or gains, that is on its income; the shareholder is taxed on his own income. The shareholder is never taxed on the company’s fund of profits, but only on the dividend which comes to him in payment of the debt which is created when the company declares the dividend. The tax is in every case on the individual’s income, not on a fund possessed by another person, the company, even though it is the fund of profits of that company, from which the individual’s income or part of it will be paid. … This principle must not be obscured by reason of the circumstance that in the way already noted, the dividend is treated as franked by the tax paid by the company. The fund which is taxed in the hands of the company and the dividend which is declared by the company in favour of the shareholder are separate items for taxation law. It is only the latter which is the shareholder’s income.’
Lord Wright
[1940] AC 81
England and Wales
Citing:
Limited – Gilbertson v Fergusson CA 1881
. .

Cited by:
Cited – Anson v Revenue and Customs SC 1-Jul-2015
Interpretation of Double Taxation Agreements
This appeal is concerned with the interpretation and application of a double taxation agreement between the United Kingdom and the United States of America. A had been a member of an LLP in Delaware, and he was resident within the UK, but not . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 October 2021; Ref: scu.573169

(1881) 7 QBD 562
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Anson v Revenue and Customs SC 1-Jul-2015
Interpretation of Double Taxation Agreements
This appeal is concerned with the interpretation and application of a double taxation agreement between the United Kingdom and the United States of America. A had been a member of an LLP in Delaware, and he was resident within the UK, but not . .
Limited – Barnes v Hely Hutchinson HL 1940
UK taxes had not been paid by the overseas company paying a dividend, but had been by the UK companies in which it held shares. The dividends received by the taxpayer were preference dividends rather than ordinary dividends, and were therefore paid . .
Overruled – Canadian Eagle Oil Co Ltd v The King 1946
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 October 2021; Ref: scu.573168

[1987] STC 36
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Anson v Revenue and Customs SC 1-Jul-2015
Interpretation of Double Taxation Agreements
This appeal is concerned with the interpretation and application of a double taxation agreement between the United Kingdom and the United States of America. A had been a member of an LLP in Delaware, and he was resident within the UK, but not . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 October 2021; Ref: scu.573172

A notice issued by an inspector was not an agreement with the taxpayer. The tax inspector’s calculation of the taxpayers liability upon receipt of the self assessment form could not be sufficient top prevent later amendments to the self-assessment returns. The assessment calculated by the inspector was treated under the Act as a calculation carried out on behalf of the taxpayer, and what was claimed was, in effect an agreement with himself.
Times 21-Mar-2000
Taxes Management Act 1970 9
England and Wales

Updated: 01 October 2021; Ref: scu.88786

UTTC INCOME TAX sideways loss relief- loss-making dairy farm businessaccepted that farmer was competent – test to be applied in order to determine whether reasonable expectation of profit- ss 67 and 68 ITA 2007-appeal dismissed
[2017] UKUT 1 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 23 August 2021; Ref: scu.577811

FTTTx Income tax – partnership – penalties for late filing of return – whether reasonable excuse – no
[2012] UKFTT 298 (TC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 17 August 2021; Ref: scu.462723

FTTTx INCOME TAX – Car made available to employee – whether benefit in light of Apollo Fuels Ltd: yes – whether capital contribution made: no – whether mileage allowance at 40p per mile due: no – disposition of appeal where repayment due reduced.
[2016] UKFTT 338 TC
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Anson v Revenue and Customs SC 1-Jul-2015
Interpretation of Double Taxation Agreements
This appeal is concerned with the interpretation and application of a double taxation agreement between the United Kingdom and the United States of America. A had been a member of an LLP in Delaware, and he was resident within the UK, but not . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 July 2021; Ref: scu.564829

Income Tax : Tax Avoidance Scheme
[2017] UKUT 418 (TCC)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 22 June 2021; Ref: scu.599430

INCOME TAX and NICs – whether monies paid by first respondent to second respondent (and others) in respect of the benefit of client connections was income ‘from’ employment and thus liable to income tax and NICs – yes – appeal allowed
References: [2015] UKUT 666 (TCC), [2015] BTC 539, [2016] STC 1393
Links: Bailii
Jurisdiction: England and Wales

Last Update: 16 October 2020; Ref: scu.558965

INCOME TAX – deduction of tax at source – whether ‘interest arising in the United Kingdom’ – ITA 2007, s 874 – source of interest – test to be applied – whether a multi-factorial test, a test of nationality of the loan document or a place of credit test – National Bank of Greece considered – appeals dismissed
References: [2015] UKUT 633 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Jurisdiction: England and Wales

Last Update: 16 October 2020; Ref: scu.558947

Income Tax – Whether the Respondent had ceased to be non-resident before the tax year 2005-2006 – Retention of the Respondent’s home in the UK to which he returned on a number of occasions during the year – Whether the First-tier Tribunal had made findings of fact justified by the evidence – Whether the First-tier Tribunal ( [2013] UKFTT 645 (TC) ) had applied the correct tests as a matter of law – Appeal allowed and case remitted to First-tier Tribunal for re-hearing
References: [2015] UKUT 551 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Jurisdiction: England and Wales

Last Update: 16 October 2020; Ref: scu.558945

INCOME TAX/CORPORATION TAX – discovery assessments – competence issues – TMA, s 29 and FA 1998, Sch 18, paras 41-43 – time limit issues – TMA, s 36(1A) and FA 1998, Sch 18, para 46(2A) – whether failure by FTT to consider competence and time limit issues was an error of law – whether issues were required to be raised by HMRC or appellants – burden of proof – appeal allowed – whether to remit to FTT – case not remitted
References: [2015] UKUT 578 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Jurisdiction: England and Wales

Last Update: 16 October 2020; Ref: scu.558941

Income Tax – penalty – application for extension of time to appeal – extension allowed
References: [2015] UKFTT 480 (TC)
Links: Bailii
Jurisdiction: England and Wales

Last Update: 15 October 2020; Ref: scu.556136

References: [2016] UKUT 361 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Ratio: UTTC Income Tax – loss relief – arrangements for exploitation of intellectual property rights – whether first-year losses incurred – whether large part of money paid for exploitation of rights or purchase of guaranteed income stream – whether remainder used within first accounting year and allowable loss in that year -appeals against First-tier Tribunal dismissed
Jurisdiction: England and Wales

Last Update: 15-Nov-16
Ref: 570415

References: [2016] UKUT 346 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Ratio: UTTC INCOME TAX- discovery assessments made against taxpayer relying on extended time limits on grounds of deliberate conduct – death of taxpayer – whether assessments should be discharged on grounds personal representative cannot receive a fair trial-ss 29 and 36 TMA 1970 -Art 6 Human Rights Convention-appeal dismissed
This case cites:

• Cited – Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002 HL (House of Lords, Bailii, [2004] UKHL 43, [2005] 1 AC 264, Times 14-Oct-04, [2005] 1 All ER 237, [2004] 3 WLR 976, [2005] RTR 13, (2004) 168 JP 669, (2004) 17 BHRC 339, [2004] All ER (D) 169)
  Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant?
  Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: . .

(This list may be incomplete)
Jurisdiction:

Last Update: 20-Oct-16
Ref: 570173

References: [2013] UKFTT 565 (TC)
Links: Bailii
Ratio: FTTTx PAYE – late submission of Employer’s Annual Return – whether scale of penalty is reasonable, and whether penalty is unfair and should be reduced – Decision of Upper Tribunal in Hok Ltd applies. Whether there was reasonable excuse for late submission of return – No.

Last Update: 14-Oct-16
Ref: 516889

References: [2012] UKUT 363 (TCC), FTC/81/2011
Links: Bailii
Coram: Warren J, P, Bishopp TJ PTC
Ratio: UTTC PAYE – employer’s year-end return – penalties for late submission – jurisdiction of First-tier Tribunal – whether includes ability to discharge penalty on grounds of unfairness – no – whether finding that HMRC’s failure to send prompt reminder unfair sustainable – no – whether penalties due – yes – appeal allowed.

Last Update: 29-Aug-16
Ref: 466696

References: Gazette 10-Mar-1993, Ind Summary 22-Mar-1993
Ratio: An Inspector of Taxes could go back on an agreed assessment which was based on misleading information provided by taxpayer.

Last Update: 29-Aug-16
Ref: 80983

References: Ind Summary 18-Oct-1993, Ind Summary 10-May-1993
Ratio: A glasshouse ‘planteria’ which was used to show plants in a garden centre, was premises and not plant for capital allowances purposes.
Statutes: Capital Allowances Act 1990 22
This case cites:

• Appealed to – Gray (Inspector of Taxes) v Seymours Garden Centre (Horticulture) CA (Times 31-May-95, Gazette 31-Aug-95, Ind Summary 19-Jun-95, (1995) 67 TC 401)
  A ‘Planteria’ for the growing and storage of plants pending sale was premises, or a building, and not plant; no allowance was available. In considering the appeal, ‘the question for this Court, as it was for the Judge, is whether the facts found by . .

(This list may be incomplete)
This case is cited by:

• Appeal from – Gray (Inspector of Taxes) v Seymours Garden Centre (Horticulture) CA (Times 31-May-95, Gazette 31-Aug-95, Ind Summary 19-Jun-95, (1995) 67 TC 401)
  A ‘Planteria’ for the growing and storage of plants pending sale was premises, or a building, and not plant; no allowance was available. In considering the appeal, ‘the question for this Court, as it was for the Judge, is whether the facts found by . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 29-Aug-16
Ref: 80985

References: [2015] UKUT 130 (TCC), [2015] BTC 512, [2015] STC 1852
Links: Bailii
Ratio:INCOME TAX /CORPORATION TAX – Losses – interpretation of s118ZC ICTA 1988 limit on loss relief for members of LLPs – whether appellant’s third share in capital of LLP was ‘contributed’ as capital (s118ZC(3) ICTA) on basis that this was the amount appellant had exposed to risk- no – whether appellant’s third share was included in amount the appellant was ‘liable to contribute’ to the assets of the LLP in the event LLP was wound up (s118Z(4)(a) ICTA) – no – appeal from Tax Chamber allowed

Last Update: 11-Jul-16
Ref: 549079

References: [2015] UKUT 262 (TTC)
Links: Bailii
Ratio Income tax – Appeal against closure notice – ‘Investment bonus’ to be paid to hedge fund managers in connection with the transfer of management of the hedge fund from one company to another – Whether payment within Schedule D Case VI – In the circumstances, yes – Appeal dismissed

Last Update: 31-May-16
Ref: 549096

References: [2015] UKUT 579 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC Ratio INCOME TAX – whether deeming provision in s 118(2) TMA could apply to deem out of time claim for repayment of income tax under Schedule 1AB TMA to have been in time where taxpayer had reasonable excuse – yes – whether tribunal had jurisdiction to hear the issue of whether claim out of time – yes – whether provisions on notices of enquiry and closure notices in Schedule 1A TMA enabled notice of enquiry and closure to be issued in immediate succession and in one document- yes – UT’s decision in Portland Gas Storage Limited considered – appeal allowed

Last Update: 06-May-16
Ref: 558944

References: [2015] UKFTT 644 (TC)
Links: Bailii
FTTTx Income Tax – late filing of self-assessment return – whether reasonable excuse – yes – appeal allowed
Last Update: 26-Dec-15 Ref: 557193

References: [2015] UKFTT 636 (TC)
Links: Bailii
FTTTX INCOME TAX – construction industry scheme – determinations under Regulation 13 of Income Tax (Construction Industry Scheme) Regulations 2005 – Tribunal’s jurisdiction in relation to Regulation 9(5) of Regulations – penalties – whether ‘reasonable excuse’ – appeal allowed in part
Last Update: 26-Dec-15 Ref: 557190

References: [2015] UKFTT 668 (TC)
Links: Bailii
INCOME TAX – application for permission to make a late appeal against income tax assessments and penalty determinations – application refused
Last Update: 23-Dec-15 Ref: 557185

References: [2015] UKUT 447 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC INCOME TAX – whether taxpayer carried on a trade – if so whether trade commercial – whether carried on with a view to profit – whether GAAP correctly applied – whether expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for purposes of trade – First-tier Tribunal deciding all issues against taxpayer – whether findings should be upheld – yes – appeal dismissed
Last Update: 16-Oct-15 Ref: 553194

References: [2015] UKUT 383 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC INCOME TAX – section 38A Capital Allowances Act 2001 – annual investment allowance – exclusion where expenditure incurred in chargeable period in which trade permanently discontinued – whether trade discontinued at end of period was discontinued in that period – yes – appeal dismissed
Statutes: Capital Allowances Act 2001 38A
Last Update: 16-Oct-15 Ref: 553189

References: [2015] UKUT 392 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC INCOME TAX – construction industry scheme – cancellation of gross payment status – s 66 Finance Act 2004 – HMRC discretion – scope of – whether properly exercised – failure to take into account effect of cancellation on appellant – appeal allowed
Last Update: 16-Oct-15 Ref: 553192

References: [2013] UKUT 51 (TCC), FTC/88/2011
Links: Bailii
UTTC Income tax – charge on retirement benefits scheme administrator under s591C ICTA 88 on cessation of approval of scheme – whether assessments raised in respect of correct year of assessment – whether raised in the name of correct person.
Statutes: Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 591C

References: [2013] UKUT 305 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC Income Tax – whether legal costs incurred by Appellant in defending criminal charges were incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of his trade – ‘purpose’ and ‘effect’ of incurring expenditure distinguished – s 74 ICTA 1988 and s 34 ITTIOA 2005 – question answered in negative by First-tier Tribunal – no error of law in determination of the FTT – appeal dismissed.

References: [2012] UKUT 59 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Coram: Mann J
UTTC Income tax – whether taxpayer can invoke section 739 of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 as against HMRC – effect of sections 739-741 – can costs be awarded in the Upper Tribunal on an appeal from the First-Tier Tribunal.
Statutes: Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 739

References: [2012] UKUT 43 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC Income Tax; emoluments; tax avoidance scheme; transfer of shares; whether a payment -No; whether shares a readily convertible asset – Yes; Income & Corporation Taxes Act 1988 sections 1, 19, 131, 202A&B, 203, 203A, 203F, The Income Tax (Employments) Regulations 1993 Regulation 2- appeal dismissed
Statutes: Income Tax (Employments) Regulations 1993, Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988

References: [2010] STC 2410, [2010] UKUT 252 (TCC), [2010] BTC 1619
Links: Bailii
Employer deducting tax at basic rate – liability of employee to underpayment of tax – Income Tax (Employment) Regulations 1993.
Statutes: Income Tax (Employment) Regulations 1993

References: [2012] UKUT 416 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC Income tax – self-assessment – self-employment – whether appellant’s returns fictitious.

References: [2011] UKUT 81 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC Tax avoidance – Income Tax – Discounts – Gilt strips – Computation of loss -Scheme designed to create excess of amount paid for the strip over the amount payable on transfer – Excess represented by ‘premium’ for grant by taxpayer of call option – Whether option price to be added back in determining amount payable on the taxpayer’s transfer – Yes – Appeal dismissed – Para 14A Sch 13 FA 1996.

References: [2012] UKUT 273 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Coram: Roth, Ghosh QC JJ
UTTC Income Tax avoidance scheme – accrued income provisions: ICTA 1988 ss 710-714, 727(2) – stock lending arrangements and capital gains tax exemption: TCGA 1992 s 263B – manufactured interest provisions: ICTA 1988 schedule 23A – ‘chargeable to income tax’

References: [2011]UKUT 470 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC Upfront payment for exclusive supply arrangement – whether capital or income receipt – the Upper Tribunal’s role on an appeal

References: [1991] 1 AC 684
Coram: Lord Templeman
The taxpayer was transferred from one football club to another. He was paid £75,000 to persuade him to move. The revenue appealed a decision that this was not a sum taxable as an emolument under Schedule E by the new employer.
Held: The appeal was allowed. A payment was ‘from’ an employment if it was made as a reward for past services or as an inducement to take up employment. There was no necessity to show hat a payment by a third party had any interest in the past performance of the employment contract.
Statutes: Income and Corporation Taxes Act 19885
This case cites:

• Appeal from – Shilton -v- Wilmshurst (Inspector of Taxes) CA ([1990] 1 WLR CA)
  The taxpayer was a goalkeeper employed by Nottignham Forest Football Club. On his transfer to Southampton, he was paid £75,000. The revenue appealed a finding that this was not taxable under Schedule E.
  Held: To be taxcable it had to be . .
• Considered – Hamblett -v- Godfrey (Inspector of Taxes) CA ([1987] 1 All ER 916, [1986] 59 TC 694)
  Affirmed. A single one off lump sum payment was found to be an emolument without consideration as to whether or not it was a capital payment. Miss Hamblett ‘received her payment as a recognition of the fact that she had lost certain rights as an . .
• Disapproved – Pritchard (Inspector of Taxes) -v- Arundale ChD ([1972] 3 All ER 1011, 47 TC 680)
  Megarry J discussed whether tips receieved were part taxable as an emolument: ‘I think the question to be tested in this way is only one question. Either the emoluments are within the statutory word ‘therefrom’, as explained by the cases, or they . .
• Applied – Hochstrasser -v- Mayes HL ([1960] AC 376)
  With reference to a charge to tax under Schedule E the Act on profits or gains from employment, or emoluments: ‘For my part, I think that [the meaning of the statutory words] is adequately conveyed by saying that, while it is not sufficient to . .
• Cited – Bray -v- Best HL ([1989] STC 159)
  There was not necessarily subsumed in the concession that a payment constituted an emolument from employment a conclusion that the payment must therefore be for a chargeable period within the aggregate period during which the employment subsisted. . .

This case is cited by:

• Appealed to – Shilton -v- Wilmshurst (Inspector of Taxes) CA ([1990] 1 WLR CA)
  The taxpayer was a goalkeeper employed by Nottignham Forest Football Club. On his transfer to Southampton, he was paid £75,000. The revenue appealed a finding that this was not taxable under Schedule E.
  Held: To be taxcable it had to be . .
• Applied – Ian Wilson (Hm Inspector of Taxes) -v- Stephen Clayton ChD (Bailii, [2004] EWHC 898 (Ch), Times 07-Jun-04, Gazette 13-May-04, [2004] STC 1022)
  Taxability of compensation paid on compromise of claims after dismissal. The employer introduced new terms, withdrawing car benefits. Having refused the new terms the taxpayer was dismissed. A tribunal held him unfairly dismissed. The council . .
• Cited – Wilson (HM Inspector of Taxes) -v- Clayton CA (Bailii, [2004] EWCA Civ 1657, Times 12-Jan-05)
  The claim against the defendant at the tribunal had been settled by a compromise which had then been the subject of an order by the tribunal. The Revenue sought to charge the payment to income tax.
  Held: It had been paid ‘in connection with’ . .

References: [2014] UKFTT 477 (TC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC PAYE — Employer’s year-end return – penalty for late submission – whether submitted on time – no – whether penalty due – yes – whether penalty can be discharged on grounds of unfairness – no – whether HMRC’s maintenance prevented submission on time – no – whether penalty proportionate – yes – whether reasonable excuse for late submission – no – penalty confirmed

References: [2013] UKUT 383 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC INCOME TAX – self-assessment – ITA ss 64, 131 – claim for relief to be ‘carried back’ intimated in earlier year return – whether FA 2008 s 130 engaged and HMRC able to set off disputed income tax liability against VAT repayment admitted to be due – TMA ss 8, 9, 9A, 42, Schs 1A, 1B – HMRC v Cotter considered – Cotter binding on this tribunal and determinative in applicant’s favour – no debit on account against which set-off could be effected VAT – whether use of FA 2008 s 130 to refuse immediate VAT repayment a proportionate remedy – yes

References: [2014] UKUT 324 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC INCOME TAX – relief for error or mistake – Section 33 Taxes Management Act 1970 – jurisdiction of the Upper Tribunal – whether decision of the Firsttier Tribunal gave rise to a right of appeal – no – appeal dismissed
Statutes: Taxes Management Act 1970 33

References: [2014] UKUT 13 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC Deduction of travel expenses – medical practitioner in private practice – travel between office at home and place of business – travel between other locations and place of business – whether ‘wholly and exclusively’ for the purposes of a trade or profession – section 74 ICTA 1988 – section 34 ITTOIA 2005

References: [2014] UKUT 292 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC Income Tax and NIC – emoluments/earnings – tax avoidance scheme – remuneration trust – employees’ individual sub-trusts – ‘protectors’ – (1) whether payments into sub-trusts were emoluments/earnings subject to PAYE and NIC; -No (2) whether loans from sub-trusts were emoluments/earnings subject to PAYE and NIC; -No (3) ‘Ramsay’ principle – whether FTT erred in law; – No – Case remitted to FTT to determine certain matters, but otherwise appeal dismissed.

References: [2013] UKUT 337 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC Income Tax – deductions for rent payable under tenancy agreement for a nine month period whilst actor appeared in stage production – were these wholly and exclusively incurred for the purposes of his profession – incorrect test applied by First-tier Tribunal – case remitted

References: [2013] UKUT 353 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
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
This case cites:

• Appeal from – Khawaja -v- Revenue & Customs FTTTx (Bailii, [2012] UKFTT 183 (TC))
  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 – Revenue and Customs -v- Khawaja ChD (Bailii, [2008] EWHC 1687 (Ch), Times)
  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 . .

References: [2013] UKUT 575 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC INCOME TAX – penalty for careless inaccuracy within a self assessment return leading to understatement of liability to tax – appellant in receipt of compensation payment exceeding £30,000 on termination of employment – appellant failed to include payment in tax return – compensation sum subsequently taxed and penalty levied – appeal against penalty – FTT held that appellant had been careless and penalty affirmed – FTT decision upheld and appellant’s appeal dismissed’

References: [2014] UKUT 68 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC Non-approved retirement benefits scheme – refusal of relief from income tax in respect of payments by employer – proper procedure for challenge by taxpayer – judicial review or statutory appeal Non-approved retirements benefits scheme – refusal of relief after issue of closure notice – whether too late to challenge refusal in appeal against closure notice (if statutory appeal were the correct route of challenge) Non-approved retirements benefits scheme – section 392 Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 – substitution of taxpayer’s brother for taxpayer as beneficiary – meaning of ‘event’ – whether substitution was a ‘payment’ if made pursuant to a moral but not legal obligation – whether payments by the brother to the taxpayer out of benefits under the scheme could be in substitution for benefits for the taxpayer

References: [2013] UKUT 225 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Coram: Norris J
UTTC INCOME TAX – claim for loss on disposal of loan stock – whether loan stock a ‘relevant discounted security’ – FA 1996, Sch 13, para 3 – whether additional payment on redemption of loan stock was interest – yes – appeal dismissed.
This case cites:

• Appeal from – Pike -v- Revenue & Customs FTTTx ([2011] STI 1990, [2011] SFTD 830, Bailii, [2011] UKFTT 289 (TC))
  FTTTx Income tax – whether a security was a relevant discounted security – security paying on redemption a sum calculated as 7.25% per annum accruing daily – whether ‘interest’ includes sums not paid periodically . .

This case is cited by:

• Appeal from – Pike -v- HM Revenue and Customs CA (Bailii, [2014] EWCA Civ 824)
  The taxpayer challenged rejection of his claim for a loss relief arising from a ‘relevant discounted security’ within the meaning of Schedule 13 to the Finance Act 1996.
  Held: It would only be such if, taking the security as at the time of its . .

References: [2014] UKUT 95 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Coram: Rose J
UTTC Income tax – car leased to employee – mileage allowance payments – whether lease arrangement falling within section 114 Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003 – application of sections 114(3) and 62 ITEPA – whether National Insurance Contributions payable on car – whether car is a ‘company vehicle’ for the purpose of section 236(2) ITEPA

References: [2014] UKFTT 473 (TC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC INCOME TAX – PAYE – penalty for late submission of Employer’s annual return – whether there was a ‘reasonable excuse’ – no – whether penalty disproportionate – no

References: [2014] UKFTT 480 (TC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC Income tax – late payment penalty – whether reasonable excuse

References: [2012] UKUT 229 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Coram: Mann J
The tax payers appealed against a finding that they had been self employed contractors and not employees while working as entertainers on cruise ships.

References: [2014] UKFTT 479 (TC)
Links: Bailii
Coram: Huddleston UTJ
UTTC Income Tax – PAYE – Penalty for late submission of PAYE return pursuant to Section 98 (2) and (3) TMA 1970 – reasonable excuse – appeal allowed

References: [2011] UKUT 433 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Coram: Briggs J
UTTC PAYE – National insurance contributions – liability to primary and secondary Class 1 National Insurance contributions – whether leaders taking Weight Watchers classes are employed earners, and Weight Watchers UK Ltd their employer.

References: [2014] UKUT 344 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC INCOME TAX – tax avoidance scheme – whether there was transfer of overseas securities and payment of manufactured overseas dividend when relevant statutory provisions construed purposively and transactions viewed realistically – no – whether annual payment not payable under deduction and retention of income tax was deductible for purposes of income tax – no – if payment deductible as payment of manufactured overseas dividends treated as annual payments within section 349(1) ICTA 1988 whether Section 3 ICTA 1988 restricts tax relief to higher rate – yes – appeal by Appellant dismissed and appeal by Respondents allowed

References: [2014] UKFTT 471 (TC)
Links: Bailii
UTTC INCOME TAX – PAYE – penalty for late submission of Employer’s annual return – whether there was a ‘reasonable excuse’ – yes in part – whether penalty disproportionate – no