Rai v Revenue and Customs [2026] UKFTT 404 (TC) (18 March 2026)
The application to amend the grounds of appeal is refused. The application was made very late, after the parties had exchanged documents and witness statements, and has already caused the loss of the original hearing window. There is no good explanation for the delay, and the new grounds could have been raised earlier. Allowing the amendment would cause further delay, additional costs, and prejudice to HMRC. The interests of justice and the overriding objective require finality and efficient case management. The balance of prejudice favours refusal.
- Citation
- [2026] UKFTT 404 (TC)
- Parties
- Appellant: Mr Surjit Singh Rai; Respondents: The Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs
- Jurisdiction
- United Kingdom
- Judgment Date
- 18 March 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Tax Appeal / Interlocutory Application to Amend Grounds of Appeal
- Outcome
- Application to amend grounds of appeal refused
- Legal Topics
- Transactions in Securities, Income Tax Act 2007, Amendment of Grounds of Appeal, Procedural Fairness, Case Management
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mr Surjit Singh Rai
Appellant
The Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal / Interlocutory Application to Amend Grounds of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellant should be permitted to amend his grounds of appeal to include the s 687(2) and s 685(6) grounds
- 2 Whether the application to amend is 'late' or 'very late' and the consequences for case management and fairness
- 3 Whether the new grounds are pure questions of law or require further evidence
Ratio Decidendi
The application to amend the grounds of appeal is refused. The application was made very late, after the parties had exchanged documents and witness statements, and has already caused the loss of the original hearing window. There is no good explanation for the delay, and the new grounds could have been raised earlier. Allowing the amendment would cause further delay, additional costs, and prejudice to HMRC. The interests of justice and the overriding objective require finality and efficient case management. The balance of prejudice favours refusal.
Court Disposition
Application to amend grounds of appeal refused
Orders
- The appellant is not permitted to amend his grounds of appeal to include the s 687(2) and s 685(6) grounds.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment