Lee v Revenue & Customs (INCOME TAX/CORPORATION TAX : Assessment/self-assessment) [2018] UKFTT 349 (TC) (26 June 2018)

Lee v Revenue & Customs (INCOME TAX/CORPORATION TAX : Assessment/self-assessment) [2018] UKFTT 349 (TC) (26 June 2018)

The Tribunal found, on the evidence, that the appellant knowingly operated a second undisclosed purchase account with his supplier, deliberately omitted related purchases from his business records to conceal suppressed takings, and that HMRC's assessments and penalties were properly calculated and justified. The appellant's denials were not credible, and his conduct was deliberate and concealed.

Citation
[2018] UKFTT 349 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: Yew Kai Lee; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
26 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
VAT Assessment, Income Tax Assessment, Civil Evasion Penalty, Schedule 24 Finance Act 2007 Penalties, Self Assessment Amendments, Deliberate and Concealed Inaccuracies
Tax Law VAT Assessment Income Tax Assessment Civil Evasion Penalty Schedule 24 Finance Act 2007 Penalties Self Assessment Amendments Deliberate and Concealed Inaccuracies

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 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yew Kai Lee

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant under-declared sales and profits for VAT and income tax purposes
  2. 2 Whether the appellant operated a second undisclosed purchase account with a supplier
  3. 3 Whether the assessments and penalties issued by HMRC were valid and within time limits

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found, on the evidence, that the appellant knowingly operated a second undisclosed purchase account with his supplier, deliberately omitted related purchases from his business records to conceal suppressed takings, and that HMRC's assessments and penalties were properly calculated and justified. The appellant's denials were not credible, and his conduct was deliberate and concealed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • All assessments, amendments to self-assessments, and penalties in the amounts originally calculated by HMRC are upheld.