Upper Tribunal Tax and Chancery Chamber

UT (Tax & Chancery) UT/2023/00099 - [2025] UKUT 00013 (TCC)

Fecha: 22-Oct-2024

Discussion and analysis

Discussion and analysis

98.

We are not satisfied that the FTT materially erred in law in making its Decision, for many of the reasons put forward by Mr Watkinson, which we address in our discussion below. We begin with the facts which are not in dispute and then apply the law to those facts.

Heading
Introduction
Background
The period before the assessments
HMRC’s letter of 7 January 2019
Subsequent correspondence regarding provision of evidence
The assessments
Further correspondence
Review decision
The Appellant’s grounds of appeal to the FTT
The FTT’s findings and conclusions
The Law
European law
Domestic statute and secondary legislation
Appeal rights against HMRC’s assessments
Relevant case law
FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL
Appellant’s submissions
HMRC’s submissions
The FTT Rules and the case law
Discussion and conclusion
SECOND GROUND OF APPEAL
The case law on jurisdiction
Petroma
Boyce
Scandico
The Appellant’s submissions
Discussion and analysis
The facts
Application of the law to the facts
The Gora principle
The substantive appeal
Implications
Conclusions