This column has often commented on the importance of procedural compliance in tax disputes. It is often tempting to focus only on the substance of the dispute and assume that a tribunal will forgive any procedural indiscretions along the way – but the recent case of Sweby v HMRC [2022] UKFTT 122 (TC) shows the dangers of such assumptions.
In that case HMRC was due to file its statement of case in 2016. It successfully applied for an extension until June 2018 when a decision was due in some similar cases. A further batch of relevant cases were due to be heard in October 2018. HMRC had apparently intended to apply for a further extension until a decision in that second batch of cases...
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:
This column has often commented on the importance of procedural compliance in tax disputes. It is often tempting to focus only on the substance of the dispute and assume that a tribunal will forgive any procedural indiscretions along the way – but the recent case of Sweby v HMRC [2022] UKFTT 122 (TC) shows the dangers of such assumptions.
In that case HMRC was due to file its statement of case in 2016. It successfully applied for an extension until June 2018 when a decision was due in some similar cases. A further batch of relevant cases were due to be heard in October 2018. HMRC had apparently intended to apply for a further extension until a decision in that second batch of cases...
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: