UT/2023/000126 - [2025] UKUT 00145 (TCC)

Ground 1 is that the assessments, properly construed, were raised on the basis that income was derived from money laundering or other criminal activity. The NCA’s case was also pleaded on this basis. It follows that the burden was on the NCA to establish that income was derived by the Appellants from such activities which each of them carried on but the NCA has failed to do so. The FTT erred in law in concluding that the NCA did not need to discharge its burden on the basis of an admission by the Appellant that had only been made in relation to rental income.

Ground 2 is that the Tribunal erred in law in concluding that s 319 POCA relieved the NCA of the need to make good their case that the Appellants derived income from money laundering or other criminal activities which they themselves carried on.

Ground 3 is that, to the extent the judgment reflects a finding that the Appellants derived income from criminal activities, this was a finding that the FTT was not entitled to make, and reflects a failure to take account of relevant evidence and the taking into account of irrelevant considerations.

Ground 4 is that the assessments, properly construed, do not relate to rental income and therefore the rental income should have been excluded.

Ground 5 is that the FTT erred in concluding that Mrs Begum could, even on the NCA’s own view, have deliberately brought about a loss of tax.