Kirby v Revenue & Customs (INCOME TAX/CORPORATION TAX : Assessment/self-assessment) [2019] UKFTT 206 (TC) (25 March 2019)
The Tribunal held that, on the evidence, the appellant failed to prove that the interest on the relevant accounts was not beneficially his and thus taxable on him; similarly, without a formal pension sharing order, the full pension income was taxable on the appellant, regardless of private arrangements with his ex-wife.
- Citation
- [2019] UKFTT 206
- Parties
- Appellant: Sean Kirby; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
- Jurisdiction
- United Kingdom
- Judgment Date
- 25 March 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Income Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax) Final Decision
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed in part
- Legal Topics
- Income Tax, Self Assessment, Beneficial Ownership, Pension Taxation, Resulting Trusts
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Sean Kirby
Appellant
The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Income Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax) Final Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether interest received on bank and building society accounts was beneficially owned by the appellant or held on resulting trust for his father and thus not taxable on the appellant
- 2 Whether liability to tax for pensions receivable by the appellant is affected by a private agreement to share the pensions with his ex-wife
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal held that, on the evidence, the appellant failed to prove that the interest on the relevant accounts was not beneficially his and thus taxable on him; similarly, without a formal pension sharing order, the full pension income was taxable on the appellant, regardless of private arrangements with his ex-wife.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed in part
Orders
- HMRC's assessments for 2011-12 and 2013-14 closure notices are upheld in relation to the interest and pension issues, except for years where HMRC conceded due to procedural defects.
- No further order as to penalty assessments.
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