In S Cormack v HMRC [2021] UKFTT (TC) (TC08289) (4 October 2021) is one of those cases where it would be fascinating to go behind the rather bare facts of the reported decision and find out what really happened. Essentially the taxpayer’s argument was that a third party had completed returns on his behalf and that he personally had not reviewed or approved the returns. The returns had because of what was said to be fraudulent activity by the third party included claims for EIS and SEIS relief despite the fact that the taxpayer had made no investments which could have qualified for those reliefs. HMRC had made a tax repayment to the third party on the basis of the EIS/SEIS claims and had then sought to assess the taxpayer for the amount previously repaid when it became clear that there was no entitlement to...
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 S Cormack v HMRC [2021] UKFTT (TC) (TC08289) (4 October 2021) is one of those cases where it would be fascinating to go behind the rather bare facts of the reported decision and find out what really happened. Essentially the taxpayer’s argument was that a third party had completed returns on his behalf and that he personally had not reviewed or approved the returns. The returns had because of what was said to be fraudulent activity by the third party included claims for EIS and SEIS relief despite the fact that the taxpayer had made no investments which could have qualified for those reliefs. HMRC had made a tax repayment to the third party on the basis of the EIS/SEIS claims and had then sought to assess the taxpayer for the amount previously repaid when it became clear that there was no entitlement to...
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:
