This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more about cookies on this website and how to delete cookies, see our privacy notice.

Company was not carrying on a property development trade for relief claim purposes

By Mark McLaughlin, February 2021

The appellant’s appeal against HMRC’s refusal to allow ATED relief for a property interest held in the course of a property development trade was dismissed by the Upper Tribunal as the First-tier Tribunal had not erred in law in determining that the appellant was not carrying on such a trade.

Summary

The appellant’s appeal against the refusal by HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) to allow annual tax on enveloped dwellings (ATED) relief for a property interest held in the course of a property development trade was dismissed as the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) had not erred in law in determining that the appellant was not carrying on such a trade.

Background

The appellant purchased a residential property in 1993 for £1.25 million. In the period between that purchase and 2007: (a) the property was occupied from time to time by persons permitted to do so by the appellant’s;

Subscribe to the McLaughlin’s Tax Case Library to get instant access
to the Tax Case Library.
14 day free trial , 90 day money back guarantee
Subscribe

Related or similar articles

ATED return was late but there was a reasonable excuse
By Mark McLaughlin, October 2023
No obligation on HMRC to issue a notice to file an ATED return
By Mark McLaughlin, July 2023
ATED relief return was filed late and there was no reasonable excuse for penalty purposes
By Mark McLaughlin, December 2022
Daily penalties for late ATED return were notified too late
By Mark McLaughlin, August 2021
Acting in good faith was not a reasonable excuse for the late filing of an ATED return
By Mark McLaughlin, July 2021