In I Miah A Uddin and A Zalil v HMRC [2017] UKFTT 767 (19 October 2017) the FTT found that it did not have jurisdiction to close a Code of Practice 9 (COP9) enquiry and that FA 2008 Sch 36 information notices had been validly issued.
The three appellants were the subject of a COP9 enquiry in relation to suspected fraud and HMRC had issued information notices under FA 2008 Sch 36. The appellants applied for closure notices in relation to the COP9 enquiry and contended that the Sch 36 notices were not appropriate.
The FTT found that it did not have jurisdiction to close a COP9 enquiry so that the appellants’ only recourse in this respect was to apply for judicial review. As to the Sch 36 notices the items contained within them were ‘reasonably required’ because the appellants’ returns...
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:
In I Miah A Uddin and A Zalil v HMRC [2017] UKFTT 767 (19 October 2017) the FTT found that it did not have jurisdiction to close a Code of Practice 9 (COP9) enquiry and that FA 2008 Sch 36 information notices had been validly issued.
The three appellants were the subject of a COP9 enquiry in relation to suspected fraud and HMRC had issued information notices under FA 2008 Sch 36. The appellants applied for closure notices in relation to the COP9 enquiry and contended that the Sch 36 notices were not appropriate.
The FTT found that it did not have jurisdiction to close a COP9 enquiry so that the appellants’ only recourse in this respect was to apply for judicial review. As to the Sch 36 notices the items contained within them were ‘reasonably required’ because the appellants’ returns...
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:
