England and Wales Case Law

Mumtaz Hussain v The Commissioners for HMRC

HMRC had, for each tax year covered by the Notice (other than 2014/2015), reason to suspect underassessment of tax, and the documents requested (excluding those relating to 2004/2005 and items withdrawn) are reasonably required to check the Appellant’s tax position. The Notice is varied to exclude items 6 and 7 and material relating to 2004/2005 from items 9, 10, and 11.

Source excerpt

• Taxpayer information notice
• Schedule 36 finance act 2008
• Discovery assessment
• Reasonable suspicion
• Burden of proof

Read case analysis

Rune Madsen v The Commissioners for HMRC

The Tribunal allowed an SDLT appeal, holding that a disclosure letter sent within the enquiry window meant the later discovery assessment was invalid.

• Stamp duty land tax (sdlt)
• Discovery assessment
• Disclosure requirements
• Tax avoidance schemes
• Finance act 2003 section 45
• Finance act 2003 schedule 10

Read case analysis

Douglas Boulton v The Commissioners for HMRC

The Tribunal upheld HMRC’s discovery assessment and penalty, finding a director’s loan was effectively written off on settlement and the return omitted it carelessly.

• Income tax
• Discovery assessment
• Penalties for errors
• Director’s loan account
• Release or write-off of debt
• Income-tax

Read case analysis

Richard Bucknell v The Commissioners for HMRC

The Tribunal found that the Appellant was the sole shareholder during the relevant tax years, as evidenced by Companies House records and absence of contrary evidence. Therefore, all dividends were correctly assessed on him. The Discovery Assessment and Closure Notices were valid, competent, and in time. The Appellant failed to discharge the burden of proof to show the assessments were excessive or incorrect. The omissions of dividend income, benefit in kind, and HICBC were due to careless or deliberate behaviour. The penalty was validly imposed. The appeals were dismissed and assessments inc…

Source excerpt

• Discovery assessment
• Closure notices
• Self-assessment tax returns
• Penalties for inaccuracies
• High income child benefit charge
• Directors’ loan account

Read case analysis

Ifoem Odina v The Commissioners for HMRC

The Appellant was beneficially entitled to 50% of the rental income from jointly owned properties for tax purposes under section 836 Income Tax Act 2007, regardless of actual receipt, as no valid Form 17 declaration was made. The Respondents' discovery assessments were valid, made within statutory time limits, and based on correct figures. The Appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence to reduce or set aside the assessments.

Source excerpt

• Higher income child benefit charge
• Discovery assessment
• Adjusted net income
• Joint property income
• Beneficial entitlement

Read case analysis

Malcome Oreain Robinson v The Director of Border Revenue

The Tribunal found that Mr Robinson failed to notify chargeability, did not provide adequate evidence of losses or cessation of rental activity, and that HMRC’s methodology for assessment was reasonable and best judgment in the circumstances. The extended 20-year time limit applied, and the assessments were upheld.

Source excerpt

• Discovery assessment
• Income tax
• Failure to notify chargeability
• Best judgment assessment
• Extended time limits
• Rental income

Read case analysis

Francis Uzoh v The Commissioners for HMRC

The Appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence that the claimed expenses met statutory requirements for deduction under ITEPA; HMRC officer made a valid discovery; Appellant was careless in wholly relying on advisor without further inquiry, thus the discovery assessments stand.

Source excerpt

• Discovery assessment
• Income tax (earnings and pensions) act 2003
• Expenses deductions
• Carelessness
• Self-assessment
• Statutory appeal rights

Read case analysis

Steven James Czerwionka v The Commissioners for HMRC

The Upper Tribunal granted permission to appeal on five grounds concerning a late tax appeal, including pressure from HMRC, authorisation, prejudice, and delay analysis.

• Late appeal
• Enterprise investment scheme (eis)
• Discovery assessment
• Permission to appeal
• Tribunal procedure
• Late-appeal

Read case analysis

Jonathan Batten v The Commissioners for HMRC

Permission to bring a late appeal was granted because, for the amendments to the partnership returns, the appellant had a good reason for the delay: HMRC’s correspondence reasonably led him to believe he had no right of appeal. For the discovery assessment and penalty, although there was no good reason for the delay, the incremental prejudice to HMRC was small and it would be unjust to refuse permission for 2019-20 when the same factual dispute would be litigated for earlier years. The three-stage Martland test was applied, following Medpro and Pawar, and the balancing exercise favored granti…

Source excerpt

• Late appeal
• Partnership tax returns
• Discovery assessment
• Appeal rights
• Bankruptcy proceedings

Read case analysis

Sharon Jacques (as Executor of the Estate of Terence Jacques) v The Commissioners for HMRC

The Tribunal found the delay of 2 years and 5 months was serious and significant, and the reasons provided—chronic illness and reliance on solicitors—did not constitute good reason for the delay. Balancing prejudice to both parties and the need for efficient litigation, permission for the late appeal was refused.

Source excerpt

• Discovery assessment
• Late appeal
• Tribunal discretion
• Statutory time limits

Read case analysis