Upper Tribunal Tax and Chancery Chamber

UT (Tax & Chancery) UT/2025/000047 - [2025] UKUT 00362 (TCC)

Fecha: 06-Oct-2025

Discussion

Discussion

52.

We must decide whether HMRC have established that the FTT made an arguable error of law in making its decision by reference to the grounds of appeal on which HMRC seek to rely and, if so, whether such appeal should be allowed or dismissed. However, the logically prior question has arisen from Mr Tolley’s oral submissions as to the application which was made by HMRC to the FTT, the reasons relied upon by HMRC before the FTT and the basis on which HMRC submits that the FTT made an arguable error of law in not acceding to that application.

53.

We address:

(1)

HMRC’s approach to the CMH and application(s) made, including the basis on which it made any application for extended disclosure against Ducas;

(2)

whether there is a general principle of reciprocity in disclosure as relied upon by HMRC; and

(3)

the FTT’s decision in the present case.

54.

We have throughout taken account of the three grounds of appeal as expressed by HMRC in the PTA Application and in the HMRC UT Skeleton alongside the oral submissions made by Mr Tolley, and address our conclusions on each after the above analysis. We have taken account of Ducas’ submissions, both as set out in the Ducas UT Skeleton and Mr Bedenham’s oral submissions.