UT (Tax & Chancery) UT/2022/000099 - [2024] UKUT 00184 (TCC)
Fecha: 24-Abr-2024
The FTT’s findings relating to HMRC’s conduct
The FTT’s findings relating to HMRC’s conduct
The FTT criticised HMRC for re-running the case which had already failed in the First Decision, saying that “despite having had the best part of 10 years to get their house in order and despite this appeal having already been through the FtT, Upper Tribunal and Court of Appeal, HMRC's case remains confused and confusing” and that their tracing of the Irwin deals “could not be trusted” see [67]-[71].
The FTT also held that HMRC’s case in relation to the Irwin deals was “affected by a collection of factors which, taken together, seriously undermine the integrity of the whole case”, that it contained “endemic and incurable problems”, and was “so pervaded with inconsistency, anomalies and flaws, that it cannot safely be relied on”, see [71] and [93].
At [72] the FTT said that those problems:
“do not arise from bad faith on the part of HMRC's officers, but…arose simply in consequence of the ordinary human factors - principally, the pressure of work in an extremely busy investigations unit with an overburden of investigative work. Mistakes crept in, and, over the course of time, became embedded in the analysis and increasingly difficult to disentangle. Even after several days of evidence and submissions before us, and despite the assistance of experienced counsel for HMRC, they remain near impossible to disentangle.”
- Heading
- Introduction and summary
- The FTT Rules
- CPR 44
- The Background
- The Costs Decision
- The starting point
- The CPR case law
- The approach under the FTT Rules
- Submissions and discussion
- The UT’s jurisdiction
- Remaking the costs decision
- HMRC’s success
- Case law guidance on conduct issues
- The FTT’s findings relating to HMRC’s conduct
- The FTT’s findings about Mr Donaldson
- The parties’ submissions
- Conclusion
- Conclusions