Abidi v Revenue and Customs (PROCEDURE - application to strike out appeal under rule 8(3)(c) of the Procedure Rules - appeal against closure notices and penalties - test to establish reasonable prospects of success - HMRC v Fairford Group & The First De Sales Ltd Partnership v HMRC considered and applied) [2025] UKFTT 863 (TC) (17 July 2025)

Abidi v Revenue and Customs (PROCEDURE - application to strike out appeal under rule 8(3)(c) of the Procedure Rules - appeal against closure notices and penalties - test to establish reasonable prospects of success - HMRC v Fairford Group & The First De Sales Ltd Partnership v HMRC considered and applied) [2025] UKFTT 863 (TC) (17 July 2025)

The appeal was struck out because the appellant failed to provide any credible evidence to support his assertions, repeatedly failed to comply with procedural directions, and the case amounted to bare assertions unsupported by evidence. The appellant's evidential case was weak, and there was no realistic prospect of success as required by rule 8(3)(c) and established summary judgment principles.

Citation
[2025] UKFTT 863 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: Arif Abidi; Respondents: The Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
17 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal / Application to Strike Out Appeal Under Rule 8(3)(c) of the Procedure Rules
Outcome
Appeal struck out
Legal Topics
Strike Out Applications, Closure Notices, Penalties, Deductibility of Expenses, Case Management, Summary Judgment Principles
Tax Law Civil Procedure Strike Out Applications Closure Notices Penalties Deductibility of Expenses Case Management Summary Judgment Principles

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Arif Abidi

Appellant

The Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Tax Appeal / Application to Strike Out Appeal Under Rule 8(3)(c) of the Procedure Rules

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appeal against closure notices and penalties has a reasonable prospect of success
  2. 2 Whether payments received by the appellant are deductible expenses under s 336 ITEPA 2003
  3. 3 Whether penalties for deliberate and careless inaccuracies are justified

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was struck out because the appellant failed to provide any credible evidence to support his assertions, repeatedly failed to comply with procedural directions, and the case amounted to bare assertions unsupported by evidence. The appellant's evidential case was weak, and there was no realistic prospect of success as required by rule 8(3)(c) and established summary judgment principles.

Court Disposition

Appeal struck out

Orders

  • Appeal is struck out under rule 8(3)(c) of the Tribunal Procedure Rules
  • Right to apply for permission to appeal within 56 days pursuant to Rule 39