James Murray King v Annie Marie Walden (HM Inspector of Taxes): ChD 12 Jun 2001

A decision to impose a penalty on a taxpayer, involved a charge of a criminal nature, for the purposes of article 6 of the Convention. It was necessary, therefore, to proceed with such a matter quickly. Even so, in the imposition of such penalties, there was no point upon which the burden of proof did not lay on the Crown, and the taxpayer had had opportunity at each stage to have his say. In this case, the matter had taken some five years. This was only just acceptable, and the Revenue should look at some way of fast tracking appeals in such matters.

Citations:

Times 12-Jun-2001, [2001] EWHC Ch 419, [2001] STC 822

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights art 6(2)

Cited by:

CitedKing v United Kingdom ECHR 16-Nov-2004
The claimant had been subject to tax penalty proceedings. They continued for more than 14 years.
Held: The length of the proceedings exceeded the time properly to be allowed, and infringed his right to a fair trial. Though the taxpayer himself . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management, Human Rights

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.82788

Carstairs (Inspector of Taxes) v Sykes: ChD 20 Dec 2000

The taxpayer had claimed tax relief for certain periods (approximately six years) when he was living abroad. The Crown appealed a decision of the commissioners discharging their assessment to tax.
Held: There is a distinction in law between the residence abroad and absence for the purposes of tax relief. The taxpayer can be resident, but absent abroad. For the purposes of the provisions of schedule E tax deductions on foreign earnings, the taxpayer should not be free to include periods when he was neither resident, nor ordinarily resident, when aggregating the qualifying period of absence. Whether someone was at any particular moment absent from the UK could only be answered in the context of the question. In this context that, must require the court to give to meaning of a qualifying period absence in the sense of not being physically present in the place of residence.

Judges:

Hart J

Citations:

Times 20-Dec-2000

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 193(1) Sch E

Income Tax, Taxes Management

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.78919

Ingenious Media Holdings Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs: SC 19 Oct 2016

The tax payer complained that the Permanent Secretary for Tax had, in an off the record briefing disclosed tax details regarding a film investment scheme. Despite the off the record basis, details were published in a newspaper. His claims had been rejected at first instance and at the court of appeal.
Held: The taxpayer’s appeal succeeded. The approach should have been within the law of confidence. The information provided was confidential. The schemes at issue were of the past, and disclosure could not assist their prevention, and ‘a general desire to foster good relations with the media or to publicise HMRC’s views about elaborate tax avoidance schemes cannot possibly justify a senior or any other official of HMRC discussing the affairs of individual tax payers with journalists.’
‘ It is a cardinal error to suppose that the public law remedies and principles associated with judicial review of the exercise of administrative power, developed by the common law from the ancient prerogative writs, occupy the entire field whenever the party whose conduct is under challenge holds a public position. It is important to emphasise that public bodies are not immune from the ordinary application of the common law, including in this case the law of confidentiality. The common law is multi-faceted and remains the bedrock of the English legal system.’

Judges:

Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Mance, Lord Kerr, Lord Reed, Lord Toulson

Citations:

[2016] UKSC 54, [2017] 1 All ER 95, [2016] BTC 41, [2016] WLR(D) 540, [2016] STC 2306, [2016] 1 WLR 4164, [2016] STI 2746, UKSC 2015/0082

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary

Statutes:

Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005 18

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At CAIngenious Media Holdings Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs CA 4-Mar-2015
The claimant sought judicial review of the disclosure, off the record by an officer of the defendant to a journalist, of confidential materials as to their investigation of his involvement in a film investment scheme. The claim had been rejected by . .
CitedRegina v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte the National Federation of Self-Employed and Small Businesses Ltd HL 9-Apr-1981
Limitations on HMRC discretion on investigation
The Commissioners had been concerned at tax evasion of up to 1 million pounds a year by casual workers employed in Fleet Street. They agreed with the employers and unions to collect tax in the future, but that they would not pursue those who had . .
CitedRegina v Inland Revenue Commission ex parte Preston; In re Preston HL 1984
Duty of Fairness to taxpayer – Written Assurance
The applicant was assured by the Inland Revenue that it would not raise further inquiries on certain tax affairs if he agreed to forgo interest relief which he had claimed and to pay a certain sum in capital gains tax.
Held: Where the . .
CitedMarcel v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis CA 1992
A writ of subpoena ad duces tecum had been issued requiring the production by the police for use in civil proceedings of documents seized during a criminal fraud investigation. The victim of the fraud needed them to pursue his own civil case.
CitedRe Arrows Ltd No 4 HL 1995
The Court of Appeal had allowed an appeal from the judge who had directed that the transcripts of examinations of a director of an insolvent company under section 236 on the Director of the Serious Fraud Office undertaking that the transcripts would . .
Ar First InstanceIngenious Media Holdings Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v HM Revenue and Customs Admn 25-Oct-2013
Application for judicial review of a decision of the Defendants acting by one of their most senior officials to disclose information relating to the claimants in an ‘off the record’ briefing with two journalists.
Held: The request for judicial . .
CitedW v Egdell CA 1990
The plaintiff was detained in a secure mental hospital, under a hospital order coupled with a restriction order, after pleading guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility. The defendant, a consultant psychiatrist, was engaged . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms HL 8-Jul-1999
Ban on Prisoners talking to Journalists unlawful
The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without . .
CitedMcKennitt and others v Ash and Another QBD 21-Dec-2005
The claimant sought to restrain publication by the defendant of a book recounting very personal events in her life. She claimed privacy and a right of confidence. The defendant argued that there was a public interest in the disclosures.
Held: . .
CitedThe Public Law Project, Regina (on The Application of) v Lord Chancellor SC 13-Jul-2016
Proposed changes to the Legal Aid regulations were challenged as being invalid, for being discriminatory. If regulations are not authorised under statute, they will be invalid, even if they have been approved by resolutions of both Houses under the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management, Information, Intellectual Property, Taxes Management, Judicial Review

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.570160

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Goldblatt: 1972

In a winding up case, the Commissioners can if necessary proceed against a receiver for misfeasance.

Citations:

[1972] Ch 498

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedTotal Network Sl v Revenue and Customs HL 12-Mar-2008
The House was asked whether an action for unlawful means conspiracy was available against a participant in a missing trader intra-community, or carousel, fraud. The company appealed a finding of liability saying that the VAT Act and Regulations . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management, Insolvency, Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.268780

Ransom v Higgs: 1973

Judges:

Megarry J

Citations:

[1974] 50 Tax Cas 1, [1973] I WLR 1187

Cited by:

CitedPaul Alexander Clark (Her Majesty’s Inspector of Taxes) v The Trustees of The British Telecom Pension Scheme and Others ChD 14-Oct-1998
The question was whether sub-underwriting commissions received by the Trustees are chargeable to tax under Case I of Schedule D and whether they are also liable to the additional rate of tax applicable to trusts. The investment managers appointed to . .
At First InstanceRansom (Inspector of Taxes) v Higgs, etc HL 13-Nov-1974
A company had devised two elaborate schemes with a view to avoiding income tax. Lord Wilberforce discussed the definition of ‘trade’: ‘`Trade’ cannot be precisely defined, but certain characteristics can be identified which trade normally has. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.183489

Arnold (Inspector of Taxes) v G Con Ltd: ChD 4 Mar 2005

The revenue appealed against an order by the general commissioners to grant to the taxpayer, a construction industry subcontractor, a fresh exemption certficate where he had been consistently late in submitting tax and NI payments of several thousand pounds.
Held: The determination was incorrect as a matter of law. The breaches could not be described as minor or technical so as to alow the commissioners to make the order they had.

Judges:

Mann J

Citations:

Times 14-Mar-2005

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 565(4)

Citing:

CitedEdwards (Inspector of Taxes) v Bairstow HL 25-Jul-1955
The House was asked whether a particular transaction was ‘an adventure in the nature of trade’.
Held: Although the House accepted that this was ‘an inference of fact’, on the primary facts as found by the Commissioners ‘the true and only . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromArnold (Inspector of Taxes) v G Con Ltd CA 12-May-2006
The tax payer company had failed to send in pay as you earn and NI returns for three years. The commissioners had found this to be only a minor failure and that the company was entitled to an exemption certificate under the construction industry . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.224049

Barclays Mercantile Business Finance Ltd v Mawson (Inspector of Taxes): ChD 22 Jul 2002

The taxpayer sought to claim for capital allowances of andpound;91 million for gas pipelines. The claimant had provided the equipment through a leasing scheme.
Held: The leases were unusual, but did not appear to be merely part of a tax avoidance scheme. However, here the company already owned and operated the pipeline, and continued to do so after the arrangement. It owed the money before, and still owed it afterwards. The issue was whether the company had incurred the expenditure in provision of the pipeline, and practitioners should be careful not to lose themselves in the technical minutiae of the documentation. This was merely financial engineering, and did not qualify: ‘If corporation tax rates changed, the head lease rent payable to BMBF would change but the sublease rent payable by BGE (UK) would remain the same. If I have understood correctly how it would work, if the head lease rent went up BGE (UK) would still pay the full amount of the sublease rent to BMBF, and the balance of the (now) increased head lease rent would be paid by BGE to BMBF; if the head lease rent went down BGE (UK) would pay part of the sublease rent to BMBF (that part being equal to the (now) reduced head lease rent) and would pay the balance of the sublease rent to BGE.’

Judges:

Park J

Citations:

Times 26-Aug-2002, Gazette 03-Oct-2002, [2002] EWHC Ch 1525, [2003] STC 66

Statutes:

Capital Allowances Act 1990 24(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedW T Ramsay Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 12-Mar-1981
The taxpayers used schemes to create allowable losses, and now appealed assessment to tax. The schemes involved a series of transactions none of which were a sham, but which had the effect of cancelling each other out.
Held: If the true nature . .
CitedMcNiven (Inspector of Taxes) v Westmoreland Investments Ltd CA 26-Oct-1998
Cross loans were made between an investment company and pension schemes. The overall effect was to create payments which could be set off against Corporation Tax. They were not a pre-ordained series of transactions where the underlying loans were . .

Cited by:

Awaiting AppealBMBF (No 24) Limited v the Commissioners of Inland Revenue CA 6-Nov-2003
The taxpayer, a non-resident, operated a sale and lease back scheme of machinery to be used in its business within the UK. There had been a chain of leases.
Held: The court had first to identify the ‘relevant lease’. It was the head lease . .
Appeal fromBarclays Mercantile Business Finance Ltd v Mawson, HM Inspector of Taxes CA 13-Dec-2002
The taxpayer entered into a sale and leaseback arrangement in respect of a gas pipeline, and sought to set off the costs as a capital allowance.
Held: The company’s appeal succeeded: ‘There is nothing in the statute to suggest that ‘up-front . .
At first instanceBarclays Mercantile Business Finance Ltd v Mawson (HM Inspector of Taxes) HL 25-Nov-2004
The company had paid substantial sums out in establishing a gas pipeline, and claimed those sums against its tax as capital allowances. The transaction involved a sale and leaseback arrangement which the special commissioners had found to be a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Corporation Tax, Taxes Management

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.174737

The Commissioners of Customs And Excise v Bassimeh: CA 20 Nov 1996

The respondent had operated a restaurant through a limited company. The commissioners issued notices of assessments and penalties against the company, now in liquidation, and the defendant, on the basis that the company had consistently under-reported its takings. The commissioners appealed a decision setting aside the notices. The argument was as to whether notices had to be issued for the separate quarters. Because the revenue could calculate the penalty as equivalent to the amount under declared, no separate calculation need be made, even though, in this case, no penalty was recoverable for part of the period.

Citations:

[1996] EWCA Civ 999

Statutes:

Finance Act 1985 13(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT, Taxes Management

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.140866

McEwan v Martin (Inspector of Taxes): ChD 20 Jan 2005

The tax inspector had sought to make an assessment outside the six year period, saying that the accounts had been prepared negligently. The taxpayer had claimed roll-over relief.
Held: The fact that the inspector had relied on professionally drawn accounts without investigating them further at the time was not a reason to disallow a reopening of the accounts. The inspector had been entitled to rely upon the accounts at the time. They did not cease to have been prepared negligently only because the tax inspector had accepted them.

Judges:

Park J

Citations:

Times 01-Jul-2005

Statutes:

Taxes Management Act 1970 36

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.228427

Khan and another v First East Brixton General Commissioners and Inland Revenue Commissioners: 1986

Judges:

Harman J

Citations:

[1986] STC 331

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedStockler v HM Revenue and Customs ChD 22-Sep-2009
The taxpayer appealed against a decision confirming the Commissioners’ power to impose a penalty on him. It was said that his solicitors’ firm had negligently understated its profits. A settlement was proposed allowing a withdrawal of the return, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.375139

Trautwein v Federal Commissioner of Taxation: 9 Sep 1936

(High Court of Australia) Latham CJ considered how the Inland Revenue might make an assessment of a taxpayer’s income and said: ‘In the absence of some record in the mind or in the books of the taxpayer, it would often be quite impossible to make a correct assessment. The assessment would necessarily be a guess to some extent and almost certainly inaccurate in fact. There is every reason to assume that the legislature did not intend to confer upon a potential taxpayer the valuable privilege of disqualifying himself in that capacity by the simple and relatively unskilled method of losing either his memory or his books.
The application of section 39 is not, in my opinion, excluded as soon as it is shown that an element in the assessment is a guess and that it is therefore very probably wrong. It is prima facie right – and remains right until the appellant shows that it is wrong. If it were necessary to decide the point I would, as at present advised, be prepared to hold that the taxpayer must ‘at least as a general rule’ go further and show not only negatively that the assessment is wrong, but also positively what correction should be made in order to make it right or more nearly right. I say ‘as a general rule’ because, conceivably, there might be a case where it appeared that the assessment had been made upon no intelligible basis even as an approximation, and the court would then set aside the assessment and remit it to the commissioner for further consideration.’

Judges:

Latham CJ, Starke, Dixon and Evatt JJ.

Citations:

[1936] 56 CLR 63, [1936] HCA 77

Links:

Austlii

Jurisdiction:

Australia

Cited by:

CitedBi-Flex Caribbean Ltd v Board of Inland Revenue PC 1990
The general burden falls upon a tax payer to provide the information to allow a tax assessment to be made: ‘The element of guess-work and the almost unavoidable inaccuracy in a properly made best of judgment assessment, as the cases have . .
CitedMomin and others v HM Revenue and Customs ChD 15-Jun-2007
The appellants challenged an assessment to income tax, saying that they had not been supported by a bona fide discovery of any loss of tax, and was otherwise unsupported by evidence.
Held: ‘The appellants have over a period of many years . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.267648

S v S (Inland Revenue: Tax Evasion): FD 1997

Disclosure of Ancillary Relief Papers to HMRC

Wilson J considered disclosure of materials filed in the course of matrimonial proceedings to the Inland Revenue: ‘Under both r 10.15(6) and r 10.20(3) I have a discretion. In the light of the authorities I propose to exercise it by reference to the following considerations.
It is greatly in the public interest that all tax due should be paid and that in serious cases, pour encourager les autres, evaders of tax should be convicted and sentenced. It feels unseemly that a judge to whose notice tax evasion is brought should turn a blind eye to it by not causing it to be reported to the Revenue. In one sense that would almost cheapen the law.
On the other hand it is greatly in the public interest that in proceedings for ancillary relief the parties should make full and frank disclosure of their resources and thus often of aspects of their financial history. Were it to be understood that candour would be likely to lead – in all but the very rare case – to exposure of under-declarations to the Revenue, the pressure wrongfully to dissemble within the proceedings might be irresistible to a far bigger congregation of litigants than is typified by the husband in these proceedings, who of course resolved not to be candid in any event. False presentations by respondents in ancillary proceedings have two repercussions, both seriously contrary to the public interest:
(a)either the judge remains deceived, in which the case the award is likely to be inaptly low, or he perceives the deception, whereupon he may draw necessarily broad inferences of hidden wealth which, depending on their scale, could make the award inaptly high or indeed leave it still inaptly low; and
(b)applicants are seldom minded to compromise their claims on the basis of presentations which they believe to be materially false and their stance, if justified by the court’s findings, will often be upheld in relation to costs. Yet the family justice system depends upon the compromise of all but a few applications for ancillary relief.
Between these two opposing public interests must the individual circumstances be weighed.’

Judges:

Wilson J

Citations:

[1997] 2 FLR 774

Statutes:

Family Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2012 29.12

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedChurchhouse, Regina (on the Application of) v Inland Revenue Admn 4-Apr-2003
The taxpayer was a revenue informer one whose trade is described by Coke as ‘viperous vermin [who] under the reverend mantle of law and justice instituted for protection of the innocent, and the good of the Commonwealth, did vexe and depauperize the . .
CitedV v W FC 2-Dec-2020
FDR Appointment Must Remain Confidential
XYZ had been appointed to value a family company within financial relief proceedings, but on seeking payment of their fees, and facing a counterclaim alleging negligence, they sought disclosure of the transcript of the Financial Dispute Resolution . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.194952

Regina (Cooke) v Revenue and Customs Commissioners: QBD 30 Jan 2007

The claimant solicitor sought a judicial review of a requirement made by the revenue that he must produce the papers of his client taxpayer under the section.
Held: The effect of the section was to require a notice to be given by a commissioner and not by an inspector, and altered the applicable provisions according to who served the notice. The section left unsaid the extent to which the commissioners could delegate their functions, and any decision remained subject to the possibility of a judicial review. A public authority has a duty to provide full and fair disclosure and explanations.

Judges:

Munby J

Citations:

Times 12-Feb-2007

Statutes:

Taxes Management Act 1970 20

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedRegina v Special Commissioner And Another, ex parte Morgan Grenfell and Co Ltd HL 16-May-2002
The inspector issued a notice requiring production of certain documents. The respondents refused to produce them, saying that they were protected by legal professional privilege.
Held: Legal professional privilege is a fundamental part of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Taxes Management

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.248919

Peter Buchanan Limited and Macharg v McVey: 1954

(Supreme Court of Ireland) The plaintiff was a company registered in Scotland put into compulsory liquidation by the revenue under a substantial claim for excess profits tax and income tax. The liquidator was really a nominee of the revenue. The defendant director had realised all the company’s assets and having paid all the debts save the revenue, had the balance transferred to himself to his credit with an Irish bank. He moved to Ireland. The action appeared to seek to recover the balance from the defendant at the instance of the company directed by the liquidator.
Held: The director’s actions were dishonestly intended to defeat the claim of the revenue in Scotland as a creditor. However though the action was in form an action by the company to recover these assets, it was found ‘For the purpose of this case it is sufficient to say that when it appears to the court that the whole object of the suit is to collect tax for a foreign revenue, and that this will be the sole result of a decision in favour of the plaintiff, then a court is entitled to reject the claim by refusing jurisdiction’ and as an attempt to enforce indirectly a claim to tax by the revenue authorities of another State, the action was dismissed.

Judges:

Kingsmill Moore J

Citations:

[1955] AC 516, [1954] IR 89

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

ApprovedGovernment of India v Taylor HL 1955
The Government of India sought to prove in the voluntary liquidation of a company registered in the United Kingdom but trading in India for a sum due in respect of Indian income tax, including capital gains tax, which arose on the sale of the . .
ApprovedIn re State of Norway’s application (Nos 1 and 2) HL 1989
The House considered an application by a foreign state seeking assistance in obtaining evidence here to be used in enforcing its own revenue laws at home.
Held: Rule 3 of the Convention encapsulated a ‘fundamental rule of English Law’, but did . .
FollowedQRS 1 APS and others v Frandsen CA 21-May-1999
The appellants were all Danish companies put into liquidation for asset stripping in contravention of Danish law. The respondent was resident in the UK and had owned them. The Danish tax authorities issued tax demands and the liquidators now sought . .
CitedWilliams and Humbert Ltd v W and H Trade Marks (Jersey) Ltd HL 1986
There had been an expropriation by Spanish decrees of shares in a Spanish company whose English subsidiary had rights in trade marks which it had sold to a Jersey company. The Spanish and English companies sought certain relief in relation to the . .
CitedHolland v Lampen-Wolfe HL 20-Jul-2000
The US established a base at Menwith Hill in Yorkshire, and provided educational services through its staff to staff families. The claimant a teacher employed at the base alleged that a report on her was defamatory. The defendant relied on state . .
CitedHill (As Trustee In Bankruptcy of Nurkowski) v Spread Trustee Company Ltd and Another CA 12-May-2006
The defendants sought relief for transactions entered into at an undervalue. The bankrupt had entered into charges and an assignment of a loan account in their favour before his bankruptcy, and the trustee had obtained an order for them to be set . .
CitedMbasogo, President of the State of Equatorial Guinea and Another v Logo Ltd and others CA 23-Oct-2006
Foreign Public Law Not Enforceable Here
The claimant alleged a conspiracy by the defendants for his overthrow by means of a private coup d’etat. The defendants denied that the court had jurisdiction. The claimants appealed dismissal of their claim to damages.
Held: The claims were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Taxes Management

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.225455

Regina v Inland Revenue Commissioners, Ex Parte Davis Frankel and Mead (A Firm): QBD 11 Jul 2000

The power of the Board of the Inland Revenue to issue notices requiring information was both draconian and intrusive. Nevertheless it was proper to issue a notice to a respectable firm of solicitors who had acted over the years for the tax payer under investigation, might well put a substantial burden upon them, but could nevertheless be delegated to a tax inspector acting as special compliance officer. The power to delegate was not limited by the later Act.

Citations:

Times 11-Jul-2000

Statutes:

Inland Revenue Regulation Act 1980 4(A), Finance Act 1976, Taxes Management Act 1970 20

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.85323

Gardner-Shaw UK Ltd and Others v Revenue and Customs (Procedure : Other): FTTTx 3 Aug 2018

PROCEDURE – application to vary directions while original directions under appeal in face of newly presented evidence – whether special circumstances – nature of relevant evidence in cases of ‘supervisory’ jurisdiction – application allowed

Citations:

[2018] UKFTT 432 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.621427

Footlong Subs Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 6 Jul 2018

Procedure : Other – – whether witness statement complied with rule 8(1) unless order – no – whether, if wrong on that, disclosure should be ordered – no – whether appeal should be struck out as lacking reasonable prospect of success – yes if not already struck out.

Citations:

[2018] UKFTT 367 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619371

Rezaee v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 11 Jun 2018

Procedure – power to review decision of Tribunal’s own motion where no application for permission to appeal made – review finding error of law in original decision – decision remade and original decision reversed – application for permission to appeal to HMRC out of time granted.

Citations:

[2018] UKFTT 302 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619358

Simply Construct (UK) Llp v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 12 Jun 2018

Procedure : Expenses – whether the appellant acted unreasonably in bringing or conducting the proceedings – Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) Tax Chamber Rules 2009, Rule 10(1)(b) – Yes – expenses awarded

Citations:

[2018] UKFTT 305 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619361

Distinctive Care Ltd v The Commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs: UTTC 15 May 2018

Procedure – costs – First-tier Tribunal Procedure Rule 10 – whether Respondents acted unreasonably in bringing, defending or conducting the proceedings – whether Appellant’s schedule of costs claimed complied with Rule 10(3)(b) – whether any breach of that rule should have been waived – guidance on content of schedule of costs

Citations:

[2018] UKUT 155 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management, Costs

Updated: 22 April 2022; Ref: scu.616368

Anderson v The Commissioners for Hm Revenue and Customs: UTTC 17 May 2018

INCOME TAX – discovery assessment – s 29 TMA – meaning of ‘discover’ – subjective and objective tests – whether Revenue officer believed that there had been an insufficiency of tax – whether officer merely had grounds for suspicion -whether it was open to officer to believe that there had been an insufficiency of tax – whether losses claimed to have arisen in a soccer academy trade were available for sideways loss relief – ss 64 and 72 ITA – whether taxpayer carried on a trade – whether on a commercial basis and with a view to or realistic expectation of profit – ss 66 and 74 ITA – whether tax-generated losses -s 74B ITA

Citations:

[2018] UKUT 159 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax, Taxes Management

Updated: 22 April 2022; Ref: scu.616366

The Trustees of Alan Deville Deceased v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 5 Apr 2018

Procedure : Scope of Tribunal’s Jurisdiction – – Scope of Tribunal’s jurisdiction to consider public law issues – whether Hok, Birkett and other cases decided per incuriam – application to strike out

Citations:

[2018] UKFTT 184 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 14 April 2022; Ref: scu.609290

Murat, Regina (on the Application Of) v Office of the Special Commissioners: Admn 26 May 2005

The taxpayer appealed a penalty imposed on him. In the appeal he had made the Commissioner the defendant.
Held: The proceedings were misconceived and an abuse of the process of the court.

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 1208 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax, Taxes Management

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.226742

MacDonald (Inspector of Taxes) v Dextra Accessories Ltd and Others: ChD 16 Apr 2003

The inspector sought to disallow charging to current tax period payments made by the employer to an employee benefit trust.
Held: The payments were not made and held by the trustees ‘with a view to becoming relevant emoluments’ within the section, and so were deductible from profits. The provision sought to restrain charging against current income payments made for the benefit of employees but which benefit was then delayed in payment. The words ‘with a view to’ were to be construed to mean to the principal and dominant intention. The dominant purpose test was not satisfied because some or all of the benefits might be paid otherwise than as emoluments.

Judges:

Neuberger J

Citations:

Times 25-Apr-2003, [2003] EWHC 872 (Ch), [2003] STC 749

Statutes:

Finance Act 1989 43(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedW T Ramsay Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 12-Mar-1981
The taxpayers used schemes to create allowable losses, and now appealed assessment to tax. The schemes involved a series of transactions none of which were a sham, but which had the effect of cancelling each other out.
Held: If the true nature . .
CitedIn re Cutts (a bankrupt); Ex parte Bognor Mutual Building Society CA 1956
Decisions are often made not for a single reason but for a number.
The phrase ‘with a view of’ a fraudulent preference was given to one creditor over others, it required it to be established what the person’s dominant intention was.
Lord . .
Appeal fromDextra Accessories Ltd and others v Inspector of Taxes SCIT 25-Jul-2002
SXIT EMPLOYEE BENEFIT TRUST – whether deduction of contributions postponed until taxable as emoluments under FA 1989 s.43(11) – no – whether sub-funds in favour of directors who controlled the company taxable as . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromMacDonald (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Dextra Accessories Ltd and others CA 28-Jan-2004
The company had set up a trust for the benefit of its employees. The Inspector sought to tax the payments made into the trust as ’emoluments’
Held: The appeal was allowed. The payments were ‘potential emoluments’ which were held by the . .
At First instanceHM Inspector of Taxes v Dextra Accessories Ltd HL 7-Jul-2005
The taxpayer companies had paid funds into a trust for employees. They sought to set off the payments against their liability to corporation tax. The revenue argued that they were deductible only in the year in which they were paid to the employees. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management, Income Tax

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.181844

Regina v R (Inland Revenue: Tax Evasion): FD 1 Jul 1998

The court declined to order the return by the Inland Revenue of documents disclosed to it regarding a husband’s failure to disclose income, where the disclosure was recent and tax payable could affected the order. The wife’s wrongful behaviour in maing the disclosure was to be reflected in court order.

Citations:

Gazette 01-Jul-1998, [1998] 1 FLR 922

Cited by:

CitedChurchhouse, Regina (on the Application of) v Inland Revenue Admn 4-Apr-2003
The taxpayer was a revenue informer one whose trade is described by Coke as ‘viperous vermin [who] under the reverend mantle of law and justice instituted for protection of the innocent, and the good of the Commonwealth, did vexe and depauperize the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Taxes Management

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.88590

Regina v Commissioners of Inland Revenue, Ex Parte Tamosius and Partners: QBD 10 Nov 1999

Officers executing a search warrant under the Taxes Management section could properly have accompany them, a legally qualified person who could make immediate assessments of any claim for protection for materials at the property searched by way of legal professional privilege. Such a procedure was sensible. An assertion of a claim of legal privilege was not to be accepted simply as asserted.

Citations:

Times 10-Nov-1999, Gazette 25-Nov-1999, [2000] 1 WLR 453

Statutes:

Taxes Management Act 1970 20C

Cited by:

CitedPrudential Plc and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax and Another Admn 14-Oct-2009
The company had obtained legal advice but had taken it from their accountants. The Revenue sought its disclosure, and the company said that as legal advice it was protected by legal professional privilege.
Held: The material was not protected. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Taxes Management

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85197

Moodie v Inland Revenue Commissioners and Another and similar: HL 7 Apr 1993

A scheme was devised to sell annuities to charities. They then used the capital sum paid to purchase promissory notes from the charity, which were in turn used to secure annuity payments.
Held: The scheme was entirely self cancelling and void. Payments made in pursuance of the scheme fell outside the ambit of the section.
There was a conversation between the plaintiff, who had been gazumped, and the defendant, who was playing the plaintiff off against another interested party in a private treaty sale. The defendant agreed orally not to market the property for a short period, and he confirmed this by letter. The defendant appealed against a finding that he had broken his promise, saying that the 1989 Act had not been complied with.
Held: A negative undertaking in the form of a lock out agreement, with a short stipulated period was enforceable, even though it was oral only. It was not itself a contract for the sale of any interest in land, and was not governed by the 1989 Act, and had not been required to be in writing.

Citations:

Gazette 16-Jun-1993, Ind Summary 15-Mar-1993, Gazette 07-Apr-1993

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 348, Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970 52(1)

Citing:

AppliedW T Ramsay Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 12-Mar-1981
The taxpayers used schemes to create allowable losses, and now appealed assessment to tax. The schemes involved a series of transactions none of which were a sham, but which had the effect of cancelling each other out.
Held: If the true nature . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax, Taxes Management

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83813

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Amerada Hess Ltd: ChD 20 Mar 2001

An oil exploration company was able to set off against the charge to Petroleum Revenue Tax on its profits from the exploitation of an oilfield, the cost of abortive explorations outside the field but less than five kilometers away. The transitional provisions following the abandonment of the tax on new oilfields did not affect this issue.

Citations:

Times 20-Mar-2001

Statutes:

Oil Taxation Act 1975

Taxes Management

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.82339

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Laird Group Plc: ChD 13 Mar 2001

It was difficult to reconcile different decisions of the higher courts. Nevertheless, the declaration and payment of a dividend which did not involve any transaction in securities, or alteration of rights attaching to securities, was not itself a dealing in securities. The arrangement involved the declaration of abnormally large dividends in purchasing another company so as to create franked income which it could then set off against its own liability to tax at tax rates applicable to its group. If a payment operated to extinguish a security, it might become such a transaction, but in this case it had not.

Citations:

Times 13-Mar-2001, Gazette 20-Apr-2001

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 706

Taxes Management, Corporation Tax

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.82347

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Oce Van Der Bgrinton Nv: ChD 21 Nov 2000

The question of how to balance double taxation provisions when considering deduction of tax at source under such an agreement with a member from dividends paid by a UK company to its Dutch parent is one to be settled by the European court. This was a question of whether this constituted a ‘withholding tax’ forbidden by the Directive.

Citations:

Times 21-Nov-2000

Statutes:

UK/Netherlands Double Taxation Agreement

European, Taxes Management

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.82354

Griffin v Citibank Investments Ltd: ChD 14 Nov 2000

Where there existed properly constituted documents recording a contract, the court could not go behind them to discover the real transaction. The rules in Ramsay is not a special set of principles restricted to issues in determining the legal effect for taxation of a series of transactions, but rather part of general rules. In this case no steps had been introduced into the transaction whose only purpose was to reduce tax liability, and they could not be seen as one composite whole.

Citations:

Times 14-Nov-2000, Gazette 23-Nov-2000

Citing:

CitedW T Ramsay Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 12-Mar-1981
The taxpayers used schemes to create allowable losses, and now appealed assessment to tax. The schemes involved a series of transactions none of which were a sham, but which had the effect of cancelling each other out.
Held: If the true nature . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management, Contract

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81036

Fitzwilliam (Countess) and Others v Inland Revenue Commissioners: HL 9 Jul 1993

An Inheritance Tax avoidance scheme was valid. When testing whether a series of pre-ordained steps could be viewed as one artificial whole, it was not open to the Commissioners to pick and to choose which steps were to be counted. The exercise became artificial when some were excluded at the option of the commissioners. Pre-planning of steps alone not sufficient to attract Ramsay interpretation

Citations:

Times 09-Jul-1993, Gazette 08-Dec-1993, Ind Summary 19-Jul-1993

Statutes:

Finance Act 1975 Schedule 5

Inheritance Tax, Taxes Management

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.80587

Customs and Excise Commissioners v A and D Goddard (A Firm): ChD 17 May 2001

The taxpayer had re-claimed input VAT on mobile phones, but no output tax was due because they were to be sold outside the UK. The commissioners alleged fraud and refused the refund. On appeal the commissioners at first withdrew the allegation of fraud, and sought to add other grounds. They were allowed a time within which to file new pleadings. In the absence of such filing, the appeal was allowed, despite a request to re-instate the allegations of fraud. The Commissioners in turn appealed. They filed. Arguments they sought to enter had not been raised earlier. The Commissioners had still disclosed no arguable or sustainable case, and it would be wrong for an appeal court to substitute its own discretion for that of the tribunal, merely in order to preserve a substantial sum for the public revenue..

Citations:

Gazette 17-May-2001

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT, Taxes Management

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79746

Faichney and Another v Aquila Advisory Ltd and Others: ChD 20 Mar 2018

The court considered claims beneficial ownership of an interest in funds otherwise made subject to an order under the 2002 Act.

Judges:

Mann J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 565 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Proceeds of Crime Act 2002

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 06 April 2022; Ref: scu.606481

Z Denmark v Skatteministeriet: ECJ 1 Mar 2018

Opinion – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Council Directive 2003/49 / EC on a common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments made between associated companies of different Member States (known as the Interest and Royalties Directive) – Concept of beneficial owner – Proprietary trading – Impact of comments of the OECD model convention on the interpretation of a European Union directive – Misuse of tax adjustment possibilities – Criteria relating to the existence of an abuse to avoid tax at source – Abuse to exploit the absence of information exchange systems between States – Direct application of a non-transposed directive provision – Interpretation in accordance with EU law of principlesnational prevention of abuse

Judges:

Kokott AG

Citations:

[2018] EUECJ C-299/16 – O, ECLI: EU: C: 2018: 148

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Taxes Management

Updated: 06 April 2022; Ref: scu.606036

X v Staatssecretaris Van Financien: ECJ 21 Dec 2011

Opinion – Freedom to provide services – Obligation on the resident recipient of a service to withhold tax at source from remuneration if the service provider is resident in another Member State – Discrimination – Restriction – Grounds of justification – Effective collection and recovery of tax – Directive 76/308

Judges:

Kokott AG

Citations:

[2011] EUECJ C-498/10

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

OpinionX v Staatssecretaris Van Financien ECJ 18-Oct-2012
Freedom to provide services – Restrictions – Fiscal legislation – Obligation on the recipient of a service, established in the national territory, to withhold at source the wages tax on the remuneration due to a service provider established in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management, European

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.605771

City Shoes (Wholesale) Ltd and Others v Revenue and Customs: CA 2 Mar 2018

The court was asked whether the Commissioners had acted with such conspicuous unfairness as to amount to an abuse of power when they curtailed the benefits available under the so-called Liechtenstein Disclosure Facility to the nine claimants in these judicial review proceedings, in relation to certain employee benefit trust arrangements which they had operated and which were under investigation by HMRC.

Judges:

Longmore, Henderson, Holroyde LJJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 315

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.605694

Knibbs and Others v Revenue and Customs: ChD 7 Feb 2018

Two sets of proceedings, each concerning several claimants, in which the Defendants now sought to strike out the claimants’ claims for declarations requiring HMRC to give immediate effect to various tax claims which the claimants have made and for declarations, that where repayments and discharges of tax have already been made, they cannot be recovered or otherwise reversed by HMRC.

Judges:

Warren J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 136 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 04 April 2022; Ref: scu.604196

Smith v Revenue and Customs (Procedure : Other): FTTTx 3 Jan 2018

FTTTX PROCEDURE – application for witness summons and orders and for disclosure – refused – Tribunal of its own motion minded to strike out appeal on grounds of no reasonable prospect of success, subject to representations – representations made and appeal struck out.

Citations:

[2018] UKFTT 6 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 03 April 2022; Ref: scu.602939

Wallace v Revenue and Customs: ChD 6 Dec 2017

The court was asked whether the relevant statutory regime permitted the claimant to pursue a claim at common law for restitution of overpaid income tax or, whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain the claim.
Held: They are two sides of the same coin. The court has no jurisdiction to entertain this claim and, therefore, the claimant has no reasonable grounds for bringing it.

Judges:

Marsh CM

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 3115 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromWallace v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 12-Apr-2013
Procedure – dismissed out of time . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management, Income Tax

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.601840

Superior Import / Export Ltd and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs and Another: Admn 11 Dec 2017

Challenge by the Claimants to the lawfulness of the decision by a Justice of the Peace sitting Birmingham Magistrates’ Court to grant 3 search warrants under s. 8 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 in relation to premises owned or occupied by them.

Judges:

Gross LJ, Carr J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 3172 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management, Magistrates

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.601506

Manhattan Systems Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Procedure : Other): FTTTx 5 Dec 2017

PROCEDURE – application for expedited hearing of de-registration decision -not made out on facts – application for consolidation of MTIC appeals with de-registration appeal – nature of Tribunal’s jurisdiction – full appellate – appeals consolidated -directions issued

Citations:

[2017] UKFTT 862 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.600996

ISPAS (General Principles of Eu Law – Right To Good Administration and Rights of The Defencea): ECJ 9 Nov 2017

Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – General principles of EU law – Right to good administration and rights of the defence – National tax rules providing for the right to be heard and the right to be informed during an administrative tax procedure – Decision to levy value added tax issued by the national tax authorities without giving the taxpayer access to the information and the documents upon which that decision was based

Citations:

C-298/16, [2017] EUECJ C-298/16, ECLI:EU:C:2017:843

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Taxes Management

Updated: 01 April 2022; Ref: scu.599682

Newcastle United Football Club Ltd and Another v HM Revenue and Customs and Another: Admn 4 Oct 2017

The claimants challenged the legality of decisions taken by HMRC to apply for search and seizure warrants under the 1984 Act in connection with a criminal investigation of suspected evasion of VAT, income tax and National Insurance Contributions by NUFC in relation to payments made to and via football agents, and the decision to issue the warrants.
Held: The challenges failed.

Judges:

Beatson LJ, Whipple J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 2402 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management, Criminal Practice

Updated: 31 March 2022; Ref: scu.597452

Piggott (Inspector of Taxes) v Staines Investment Ltd: ChD 1 Mar 1995

An arrangement which had the effect of mitigating tax by a pre-ordained series of steps was nevertheless upheld as valid. Transactions were not caught by anti-avoidance provisions, where they were not in fact one composite whole.

Citations:

Gazette 01-Mar-1995, Times 07-Feb-1995

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 239

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Corporation Tax, Taxes Management

Updated: 31 March 2022; Ref: scu.84733

Revenue and Customs v SDI (Brook Eu) Ltd and Another: UTTC 11 Aug 2017

PROCEDURE – application to strike out appellants’ appeal for lack of jurisdiction – whether HMRC had made an appealable decision – FTT refusal to strike out – whether FTT erred in law – whether decision of FTT should be set aside

Citations:

[2017] UKUT 327 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 30 March 2022; Ref: scu.595600

Chadwick (As Trustee In Bankruptcy of Oduneye-Braniffe) v The National Crime Agency: FTTTx 30 Aug 2017

Income Tax/Corporation Tax : Proceeds of Crime Act – INCOME TAX – Exercise of revenue functions by NCA – whether qualifying condition met – validity of assessments on pre-bankruptcy income addressed to trustee – whether deliberate conduct properly pleaded – validity of assessments assessing one figure on two bases – whether returns required and made – whether discovery of loss of tax – whether bankrupt was carrying on trade of money laundering from which profits arose – appeals allowed.

Citations:

[2017] UKFTT 656 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax, Taxes Management

Updated: 30 March 2022; Ref: scu.594543

Glencore Energy UK Ltd v Revenue and Customs: Admn 29 Jun 2017

Judges:

Green J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 1476 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoGlencore Energy UK Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Leave to appeal) Admn 29-Jun-2017
The parties disputed the power of the court to grant leave to appeal against its own decision. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Corporation Tax, Taxes Management

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.588878

SRN Horizon Limited v Revenue and Customs (Procedure): UTTC 15 Jun 2017

PROCEDURE – appeal withdrawn in error by appellant’s solicitors – reinstatement application made on following day – Tax Chamber Rules r 17 – whether appropriate to deal with application without a hearing – tribunal’s assessment that appeal without merit and reinstatement refused – factors tribunal should take into account – appeal allowed, decision set aside and matter remitted to First-tier Tribunal for reconsideration

Citations:

[2017 UKUT 246 ( (TCC) )

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.588002

Hope v Revenue and Customs: ChD 6 Apr 2017

By a Part 7 claim, the Respondent to a bankruptcy petition presented by Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (‘HMRC’), Emma Hope, seeks to set aside a previous judgment of the High Court, on the ground that the it was obtained as a result of fraudulent misrepresentations. The claim also seeks damages for HMRC’s ‘acts of fraud and/or negligence/and or breach of statutory duty’. The Revenue now applied to strike out the claim.
Held: It was struck out.

Judges:

Briggs Reg

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 812 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Insolvency Act 1986 252

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Insolvency, Taxes Management

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.583988

VVB Engineering Services Ltd and Others, Regina (on The Applications of) v Revenue and Customs: Admn 16 Mar 2017

Judicial review claims challenging accelerated payment notices and partner payment notices issued by HMRC to tax payers under Part 4, Chapter 3 and Schedule 32 of the Finance Act 2014

Judges:

Supperstone J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 506 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Finance Act 2014

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581101

Jenks v Dickinson (Inspector of Taxes): ChD 16 Jun 1997

Legislation which created a clear anomaly can be interpreted so as to avoid the anomaly if the words used are sufficiently ambiguous as to allow an alternative construction.
Neuberger J discussed the case of Marshall v Kerr, saying: ‘It appears to me that the observations of Peter Gibson J, approved by Lord Browne-Wilkinson, in Marshall indicate that, when considering the extent to which one can ‘do some violence to the words’ and whether one can ‘discard the ordinary meaning’, one can, indeed one should, take into account the fact that one is construing a deeming provision. This is not to say that normal principles of construction somehow cease to apply when one is concerned with interpreting a deeming provision; there is no basis in principle or authority for such a proposition. It is more that, by its very nature, a deeming provision involves artificial assumptions. It will frequently be difficult or unrealistic to expect the legislature to be able satisfactorily to [prescribe] the precise limit to the circumstances in which, or the extent to which, the artificial assumptions are to be made.’

Judges:

Neuberger J

Citations:

Times 16-Jun-1997, [1997] STC 853

Statutes:

Finance Act 1989 138(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedMarshall (Inspector of Taxes) v Kerr CA 7-Apr-1993
A variation of trusts in Jersey will be deemed to have been made by the deceased – no Capital Gains Tax arising. Interpretation of deeming Provisions. The taxpayer was not a settlor in an overseas trust. Deeming provisions should not generally be . .
CitedMarshall (Inspector of Taxes) v Kerr HL 30-Jun-1994
A settlor by will was deemed to have had an interest as funds were passed to a Jersey Trust. The section merely made or allowed that a variation of a will would not be a taxable event in UK law. It had no other effects. A deed of family arrangement . .

Cited by:

CitedHarding v Revenue and Customs CA 23-Oct-2008
Lapsed Currency conversion option lost status
The taxpayer appealed his assessment to Capital Gains Tax on his redemption of loan notes arising following the sale of his computer company. He said that they were qualifying corporate bonds. The question was whether a security in which a currency . .
CitedRevenue and Customs v DCC Holdings (UK) Ltd SC 15-Dec-2010
The taxpayer had entered into a ‘repo’ loan to its bank, agreeing to purchase a block of gilt edged securities, and to resell them at a later date at a fixed figure. The profit and figures included an allowance for the interest payments to be made. . .
CitedHancock and Another v Revenue and Customs SC 22-May-2019
The taxpayers sold their shares in return for loan notes in the form of mixed qualifying (QCB) and non qualifying corporate bonds (Non-QCB) within section 115 of the 1992 Act. Gains on the disposal of QCB would be exempt from CGT. These were then . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Capital Gains Tax, Taxes Management

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.82512

Sutherland and Others v Gustar (Inspector of Taxes): ChD 17 May 1993

One partner may not appeal against an assessment to tax against the wishes of his or her partners.

Citations:

Ind Summary 31-May-1993, Times 17-May-1993

Statutes:

Taxes Management Act 1970 56

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromSutherland and Others v Gustar (Inspector of Taxes) CA 28-Feb-1994
One of several partners may appeal against the firm’s tax assessment without his partners’ approval. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax, Taxes Management

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.89626

Westminster Trading Ltd and Others v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 25 Jan 2017

UTTC PROCEDURE – MTIC appeals- refusal of application to adjourn substantive hearing of appeals in circumstances where appellants’ representative and main witness unfit to participate in the proceedings – whether decision not to adjourn within the ambit of the proper exercise of judicial discretion in the circumstances-yes – appeals dismissed

Citations:

[2017] UKUT 23 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management, VAT

Updated: 04 February 2022; Ref: scu.577812

Huitson v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 22 Feb 2017

UTTC PROCEDURE – application by Applicant to set aside decision refusing application extension of time to provide notice of appeal to Upper Tribunal – refused – application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal – refused

Citations:

[2017] UKUT 75 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 04 February 2022; Ref: scu.577815

Revenue and Customs v Tager: UTTC 24 Feb 2017

UTTC PROCEDURE- penalty imposed in accordance with FA 2008, Sch 36, para 50 – parties agreed that decision records incorrect amount – correction made – whether jurisdiction to admit further evidence to support reduction in penalty following publication of decision – no – whether, if jurisdiction assumed, evidence should be admitted – no 27 February 2017

Citations:

[2017] UKUT 84 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Finance Act 2008

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 04 February 2022; Ref: scu.577816

Cotter v Revenue and Customs: SC 6 Nov 2013

This appeal asked as to the boundary between the jurisdiction of the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) and that of the county court or the High Court, and the legality of the approach which the Revenue took to entries which Mr Cotter, had made in a tax return. He had submitted a tax return but then submitted amendments claiming for losses in the following year. The Revenue sought payment of the tax due under the unamended return by proceedings in the County Court. The taxpayer said that any such proceedings had to be in the First Tier Tribunal, because that Tribunal had exclusive jurisdiction to decide at what stage losses were to be allowed for in the amended return. The erevenue appealed aginst the decision that it must claim in the First Tier Tribunal.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The term ‘return’ refersdto the information in the tax return form which is submitted for ‘for the purpose of establishing the amounts in which a person is chargeable to income tax and capital gains tax’ for the relevant year of assessment and ‘the amount payable by him by way of income tax for that year’. Not everything put in the Tax return by the taxpayer need be in law part of the return. The actual question was whether the claim for losses entered into the return amounted to a defence to the Revenue’s claim for tax. As such that question could be answered in the County and High Courts. It was not an appeal against an assessment to tax for a particular year, which would have to go to the Tribunal.

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed, Lord Toulson, Lord Hodge

Citations:

[2013] UKSC 69, [2013] BTC 837, [2013] 1 WLR 3514, [2013] STC 2480, [2013] STI 3450, [2014] 1 All ER 1, UKSC 2012/0062, [2014] 1 All ER 1

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC Summary, SC

Statutes:

Income Tax Act 2007 128

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedAutologic Holdings Plc and others v Commissioners of Inland Revenue HL 28-Jul-2005
Taxpayer companies challenged the way that the revenue restricted claims for group Corporation Tax relief for subsidiary companies in Europe. The issue was awaiting a decision of the European Court. The Revenue said that the claims now being made by . .
CitedBlackburn (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Keeling CA 21-Aug-2003
The tax payer sought to have reflected in his PAYE coding, his substantial trading losses arising from his activities as a Name /underwriter at Lloyds in 2003.
Held: The underwriting year 2003 ends in the year of assessment 2003/4, and . .
At ChDRevenue and Customs v Cotter ChD 14-Apr-2011
The taxpayer’s accountants had submitted a tax return amending the taxpayer’s own return adding claims for losses. The accountant acknowledged the contentious nature of the claim and invited a review. The Revenue sought now to recover the tax due . .
CitedHM Revenue and Customs v Cotter CA 8-Feb-2012
Mr Cotter’s accountants had submitted a second tax return adding claims to loss relief in the following year. The claims were contentious, but he invited a review by the Revenue asserting that the losses wiped out any liability to tax. The Revenue . .

Cited by:

CitedDe Silva and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs SC 15-Nov-2017
The appellants had entered into certain partnerships designed to mitigate liability too income tax by creating trading losses through investments in films. HMRC rejected the claims. HMRC then sought to backdate adjustments to the carry-back claims . .
CitedDerry, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs SC 10-Apr-2019
D bought 500,000 shares in TY 2009/10 for pounds 500,000 in Media Pro Four Ltd. In tax year 2010/11 he sold them to ‘Island House Private Charitable Trust’ for pounds 85,500, realising a loss of pounds 414,500. His 2009/10 tax return claimed share . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management, Income Tax

Updated: 03 February 2022; Ref: scu.517445

Archer, Regina v HM Revenue and Customs: Admn 21 Feb 2017

Application for judicial review raises a point of principle regarding the effect of closure notices – given by HMRC to taxpayers pursuant to section 28A of the 1970 Act which fail to specify the amount of the tax HMRC contends should be paid.

Judges:

Jay J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 296 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Taxes Management Act 1970 28A

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 03 February 2022; Ref: scu.577290

Without Notice Application v Revenue and Customs (Procedure : Other): FTTTx 1 Feb 2017

PROCEDURE – information notice – Sch 36 FA 2008 – taxpayer’s representations – tribunal approval – tribunal has no discretion or jurisdiction to direct that the taxpayer can attend the approval hearing – no abuse of process in HMRC seeking an approved notice.

Citations:

[2017] UKFTT 148 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.574085

Wheels Common Investment Fund Trustees Ltd and Others v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 16 Dec 2016

FTTTx (Procedure : Other) PROCEDURE – application to amend grounds of appeal – whether proposed amendment is amendment to existing claim or new claim – Reed Employment Limited v HMRC [2013] UKUT 109 (TC) and HMRC v Vodafone Group Services Ltd [2016] UKUT 89 (TC) considered – held proposed amendment not new claim – application granted

Citations:

[2017] UKFTT 830 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.574013

D v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 22 Dec 2016

FTTTx (Procedure : Hearings In Private) PROCEDURE – application for hearing in private – rule 32 of Tribunal Rules – celebrity status of the appellant – deductibility of expenses against income – principle of open justice – whether the test of necessity for derogation met – whether anonymity strictly necessary – whether confidentiality of information at risk of breach – whether right to privacy infringed – Convention rights under Articles 6, 8 and 10 – Human Rights Act 1998 – proportionality – alternative measures under rule 14 and s 4(2) of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 – application refused

Citations:

[2017] UKFTT 850 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management, Human Rights

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.573980

Hackett v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 23 Nov 2016

PROCEDURE – personal liability notice – FA 2007, Sch 24, para 19 – application of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights – appellant’s application for a stay – whether HMRC’s decision to proceed by way of civil penalty an abuse of process – inability to obtain a representation order – whether standard of proof should be the criminal standard – HMRC’s application to strike out parts of appellant’s grounds of appeal for abuse of process in seeking to re-litigate matters the subject of earlier appeals by the company – application to admit into evidence a prior tribunal decision

Citations:

[2016] UKFTT 781 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Human Rights, Taxes Management

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.573949

British Security Industry Association Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 28 Nov 2016

FTTTx (Costs – Complex Categorisation) COSTS – complex categorisation – whether normal order costs follow event should not be made when, after appellant has filed its evidence, HMRC raise unjust enrichment defence leading to withdrawal of appeal

Citations:

[2016] UKFTT 786 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.573946