Cliff v Revenue & Customs (INCOME TAX/CORPORATION TAX : Losses) [2019] UKFTT 564 (TC) (04 September 2019)

Cliff v Revenue & Customs (INCOME TAX/CORPORATION TAX : Losses) [2019] UKFTT 564 (TC) (04 September 2019)

The appellant was not trading commercially with a view to profit; his activities did not constitute a trade under the relevant tax legislation. The description 'dealer in thoroughbreds' was inaccurate and used deliberately. The appellant failed to provide evidence of actual trading losses. Relief was not available, and the discovery assessments and penalties were validly imposed. The appellant did not have a reasonable excuse for the inaccuracies in his returns.

Citation
[2019] UKFTT 564 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: David Cliff; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
04 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Income Tax/corporation Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax) Substantive Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Income Tax, Corporation Tax, Trade Loss Relief, Discovery Assessments, Penalties for Inaccuracies, Trading Commercially, Deliberate Behaviour, Section 29 TMA 1970, Schedule 24 FA 2007
Tax Law Income Tax Corporation Tax Trade Loss Relief Discovery Assessments Penalties for Inaccuracies Trading Commercially Deliberate Behaviour +2 more

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Cliff

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Income Tax/corporation Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax) Substantive Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was trading commercially with a view to profit
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was entitled to trade loss relief under Section 64 Income Tax Act 2007
  3. 3 Whether the appellant acted deliberately or carelessly in his tax returns

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant was not trading commercially with a view to profit; his activities did not constitute a trade under the relevant tax legislation. The description 'dealer in thoroughbreds' was inaccurate and used deliberately. The appellant failed to provide evidence of actual trading losses. Relief was not available, and the discovery assessments and penalties were validly imposed. The appellant did not have a reasonable excuse for the inaccuracies in his returns.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Discovery assessments for 2009/10, 2010/11, and 2011/12 confirmed
  • Closure notice for 2012/13 confirmed