Transfer of real property into unapproved benefit scheme
In HMRC v Mitesh Dhanak (FTC/52/2012 – 11 February 2014) Mr Dhanak had set up an unapproved retirement benefit scheme for his sole benefit.
In April 2009 following the decision of the Court of Appeal in Irving v HMRC [2008] EWCA Civ 6 HMRC had concluded its inquiry into Mr Dhanak’s returns by amending them in relation to transfers of real property which were now considered as ‘sums paid’ into the scheme.
In January 2010 Mr Dhanak’s brother became the sole beneficiary of the scheme. Mr Dhanak therefore applied for relief under ITEPA 2003 s 392.
The Upper Tribunal (UT) noted that unlike many provisions in the Taxes Act there is no provision for an appeal against a refusal of relief under s 392 and concluded that there was no legislative intention that a refusal of...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
Transfer of real property into unapproved benefit scheme
In HMRC v Mitesh Dhanak (FTC/52/2012 – 11 February 2014) Mr Dhanak had set up an unapproved retirement benefit scheme for his sole benefit.
In April 2009 following the decision of the Court of Appeal in Irving v HMRC [2008] EWCA Civ 6 HMRC had concluded its inquiry into Mr Dhanak’s returns by amending them in relation to transfers of real property which were now considered as ‘sums paid’ into the scheme.
In January 2010 Mr Dhanak’s brother became the sole beneficiary of the scheme. Mr Dhanak therefore applied for relief under ITEPA 2003 s 392.
The Upper Tribunal (UT) noted that unlike many provisions in the Taxes Act there is no provision for an appeal against a refusal of relief under s 392 and concluded that there was no legislative intention that a refusal of...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
