TC09620 - [2025] UKFTT 01061 (TC)

Fecha: 25-Abr-2025

Decisions

Decisions

10.

Whilst the parties agreed that the decisions are ones which can be appealed to the tribunal, they disagreed as to their precise nature and scope and the appellant suggested that in some instances, in making them, HMRC did not act under the correct statutory powers. Therefore, I have set out details of the decisions and the statutory provisions pursuant to which HMRC state they were made and those which Majestic argues are in point.

11.

I note that, as HMRC submitted:

(1)

An appeal to the tribunal under s 16 FA can only be made in respect of the actual decision that has been made by HMRC not some other hypothetical decision (see Scandico Ltd v HMRC [2017] UKUT 467 (TCC), at [39]). A notice of appeal cannot change either the nature of the decision actually made, or the tribunal’s jurisdiction in respect of that decision (see FS Commercial Ltd v HMRC [2025] UKUT 00013 (TCC), at [78] and [79]).

(2)

Whether HMRC might have made different decisions, or whether different statutory powers might have been involved in making those different decisions, or whether the decisions are ultra vires the statutory power on which they are said to have been based, irrational or otherwise unlawful is not relevant to the tribunal’s consideration of whether the appellant has standing to appeal the decisions that were actually made. The tribunal must identify the actual decisions made and then determine the appellant’s standing to appeal against them, and therefore the tribunal’s jurisdiction to hear the appeal. It is not the function of the tribunal in deciding this application to determine whether the actual decisions made were lawful or not, since that would amount to determining the substantive appeal, not the question of standing and therefore jurisdiction.