UT/2024/000087 - [2025] UKUT 00287 (TCC)

Whilst there may be some distinction to be drawn between legal representatives and non-legal representative in relation to dealing with procedural and evidential issues in this case the FTT specifically raised the admission of the evidence with the Appellant’s representative. He did not raise an objection. Accountants regularly deal with appeals before the FTT. Mr Doshi had raised issues regarding evidence – in respect of this particular evidence he had argued that the lack of the source documents undermined the analysis and invited the FTT to draw an adverse inference against the Respondents for failure to produce the underlying evidence referring to authority in support – see [22]-[29]. I do not consider that there was any procedural unfairness. In any event as I set out in my earlier refusal the meal ticket analysis was not the only evidence the FTT considered in reaching its conclusions on the evidence – see paragraph 66. The evidence of HMRC regarding the meal tickets is consistent with the other evidence of suppression of sales including Mr. Chan’s evidence of the percentage of cash sales.

Permission to appeal is refused on Ground 4.