![TC09623 - [2025] UKFTT 01064 (TC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_7HSuEAV.png){kind=logo}
There is no evidence that HMRC have failed to cooperate with the tribunal in furtherance of the overriding objective
There is no evidence that HMRC have failed to cooperate with the tribunal in furtherance of the overriding objective.
The discovery assessments and the letters which were sent with them gives a considerable amount of information to the appellant to enable him to understand the basis of HMRC’s challenge.
HMRC have the burden of establishing that the discovery assessments were valid in time assessments. To do this they will need to show that an officer made a subjective and objective discovery and a valid assessment pursuant to that discovery. It is up to them to decide how to establish this. They must be allowed to do this at a trial. If they bring witnesses who gave oral evidence, the appellant can cross examine those witnesses. Without a substantive hearing it will not be possible to decide whether or not a valid discovery has been made.
- Heading
- Introduction
- THE FACTUAL BACKGROUND
- DISCUSSION
- Submissions
- HMRC are in breach of their obligations under the taxpayer’s charter on which the appellant is entitled to rely
- The best approach to evidence is to rely on documents, but these are no no longer obtainable
- There were significant changes to the tax landscape in this area, given Rangers and Hoey , and the issues around the imposition of the loan charge. These needed to be clarified before these appeals co
- There has been no delay since the submission of the appeal to the tribunal
- There is no evidence that HMRC have failed to cooperate with the tribunal in furtherance of the overriding objective
- Staleness is not relevant in this context. This is not a situation where an assessing officer has sat on discovery before issuing the assessment. Furthermore, given the decision in HMRC v Tooth [2021]
- My view
- Pleading the fair trial issue
- Conclusions