TC09569 - [2025] UKFTT 00821 (TC)

This is the appellant’s appeal against assessments to income tax dated 1 February 2023 in the total sum of £47,998.25 for the tax years ending 5 April 2021 and 2022. They were issued pursuant to paragraph 9 of Schedule 16 to the Finance Act 2020 (“FA 20”). The first assessment was in the sum of £22,872.70 for the accounting period ending (“APE”) 30 November 2020 for the year ended 5 April 2021. The second was also for the year ended 5 April 2021 but was for the APE 30 November 2021 and was in the sum of £16,538.03. The third was in the sum of £8,587.52 for the APE 30 November 2021 for the year ended 5 April 2022.

HMRC request that the Tribunal exercise their power under section 50(6) of the Taxes Management Act 1970 (“TMA”) to decrease the later assessments relating to the two APEs 30 November 2021 from a total of £25,125.55 to £24,910.81 and in respect of the assessment for the APE 30 November 2020 to increase that from £22,872.70 to £23,579.13 in terms of section 50(7) TMA. The precise quantum is as set out in the Appendix to HMRC’s Statement of Case.

Under the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (“CJRS”), the appellant had claimed and received CJRS Support Payments or grants in relation to two employees (“the Employees”). There were 15 claims covering the period 6 March 2020 to 31 May 2021.

HMRC’s case is that the sums claimed were excessive and therefore they issued the assessments to claw back the overpayments.

That was on the basis that the appellant had failed to calculate the claims in accordance with paragraphs 5, 7 and 8 of The Coronavirus Act 2020 Functions of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme) Direction (“the First Direction”). The First Direction is dated 15 April 2020 and was made in exercise of the powers conferred on HMRC in terms of sections 71 and 76 of the Coronavirus Act 2020.

The appellant argues that the calculations were accurate and predicated on the salaries actually paid to the Employees and reported to HMRC contemporaneously.

With the consent of the parties, the hearing was conducted by video link using TEAMS. Prior notice of the hearing had been published on the gov.uk website, with information about how representatives of the media or members of the public could apply to join the hearing remotely in order to observe the proceedings. As such, the hearing was held in public.

The documents to which we were referred comprised a Documents Bundle consisting of 760 pages. We had Skeleton Arguments for both parties. At the outset of the hearing we received copies of two emails. The first was the appellant’s objection to HMRC’s application to lodge a copy of the decision in KNR Flooring Limited v HMRC [2025] UKFTT 526 (TC) (“KNR”) and the second was a copy of an email from the appellant dated the evening before enclosing copies of bank statements for the Employees for the months of January and February 2020.

We heard evidence from Officer Laird and Mr Mitchell.