Another fine mess HMRC got themselves into

HMRC officer emulates Ulverston's finest

Didn't find your answer?

  Yet again HMRC do not understand the difference between "evidence" and "the precise documents I've asked for, whether they exist or not, and no others", as the hapless fools "investigate" an EOHO claim.  Nigel Popplewell and Mohammed Farooq put them right as they fail on the objective test for raising a DA - see [40] - [55] in the decision.  

https://financeandtax.decisions.tribunals.gov.uk/judgmentfiles/j12985/TC%2009085.pdf

Replies (2)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
By Justin Bryant
01st Mar 2024 11:07

That's interesting, as cases where the DA objective test is failed (especially completely as in this case) are pretty rare.

Reminds me of this (albeit a non-DA case): https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/tax/hmrc-policy/tax-nightmare-hmrc-error...

Unsurprisingly, I don't think I've ever seen the DA subjective test failed (and it seems a rather pointless test in practice if you think about it, unless possibly a DA gets issued accidentally and HMRC assert it's valid in the 1st place nevertheless).

Thanks (0)
By ireallyshouldknowthisbut
01st Mar 2024 11:54

Some of these officers really aint too bright.

But is amusing to see HMRC argue agasint cash, its normally the other way around.....

Thanks (0)