Ho v Revenue & Customs [2010] UKFTT 387(TC) (19 August 2010)

Ho v Revenue & Customs [2010] UKFTT 387(TC) (19 August 2010)

The Tribunal found that Mr Ho did not understate his takings or profits for the relevant tax year except for two days, which was due to accidental loss of receipts and not negligence. HMRC's assumptions about working pattern and cash flow were not supported by evidence. Therefore, the amendments and discovery assessments were not justified and the appeals were allowed.

Citation
[2010] UKFTT 387
Parties
Appellant: Stephen Ho; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Income Tax)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
19 August 2010
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax), Post Internal Review, Substantive Hearing and Written Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Income Tax, Self Assessment, Discovery Assessments, Negligence, Tribunal Procedure, Costs
Tax Law Income Tax Self Assessment Discovery Assessments Negligence Tribunal Procedure Costs

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Ho

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Income Tax)

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax), Post Internal Review, Substantive Hearing and Written Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr Ho understated his takings and profits for the tax year ended 5 April 2004
  2. 2 Whether HMRC lawfully raised discovery assessments for other years based on alleged under-declaration
  3. 3 Whether there was negligence by Mr Ho justifying discovery assessments under s 29(4) TMA

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that Mr Ho did not understate his takings or profits for the relevant tax year except for two days, which was due to accidental loss of receipts and not negligence. HMRC's assumptions about working pattern and cash flow were not supported by evidence. Therefore, the amendments and discovery assessments were not justified and the appeals were allowed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Amendments to self assessment and discovery assessments for all relevant years set aside
  • Directions given for costs application process; HMRC to confirm opposition and Appellant to submit schedule of costs within 28 days