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.

Taxpayers’ behaviour was not fraudulent/deliberate but was negligent/careless

By Mark McLaughlin, November 2020

HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) opened enquiries into the appellants’ self-assessment returns for the tax year 2012/13. For that tax year, the first appellant had income from his self-employment as a mini-cab driver and from property. The second appellant had income arising from property. Both declared profits from those activities in that tax year.  

HMRC considered that the appellants’ income was under-declared for 2012/13. Using the presumption of continuity, HMRC also considered adjusting the profits for the tax years 2011/12 back to 1996/97, by uplifting the declared property ‘profits’. HMRC considered that the errors in the returns were due to deliberate actions and assessed penalties on that basis. The appellants appealed. 

The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) considered that there was insufficient evidence to conclude that the amounts in the appellants’ tax returns were accurate. The

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

What if HMRC delays the repayment of VAT?
By Andrew Needham, January 2023
Legal and insurance costs in settlement agreement were employment income
By Mark McLaughlin, March 2021
Information letter about HICBC received before child’s birth was not a reasonable excuse for failing to notify the charge
By Mark McLaughlin, March 2021
HMRC could not refresh time limit for penalty by reissuing information requirements
By Mark McLaughlin, December 2020
Presumption of continuity applied in determining taxable profits
By Mark McLaughlin, December 2020