In Spring Salmon & Seafood v HMRC [2017] UKUT 205 (2 June 2017) the UT found that a terminal loss relief claim was not a stand-alone claim which required an enquiry separate from the enquiry into the final return.
HMRC had opened and closed an enquiry. Spring Salmon contended that its claim to carry back terminal loss relief (which the closure notice dismissed) was a stand-alone claim which could not validly be dealt with under FA 1998 Sch 18 and required a separate enquiry under TMA 1970 Sch 1A so that the closure notice had no effect on the claim. The issue was therefore whether HMRC should have opened a separate enquiry under TMA 1970 Sch 1A in order to challenge the claim for carry back loss relief.
The UT found that Spring Salmon’s argument was flawed in dividing the terminal loss...
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 Spring Salmon & Seafood v HMRC [2017] UKUT 205 (2 June 2017) the UT found that a terminal loss relief claim was not a stand-alone claim which required an enquiry separate from the enquiry into the final return.
HMRC had opened and closed an enquiry. Spring Salmon contended that its claim to carry back terminal loss relief (which the closure notice dismissed) was a stand-alone claim which could not validly be dealt with under FA 1998 Sch 18 and required a separate enquiry under TMA 1970 Sch 1A so that the closure notice had no effect on the claim. The issue was therefore whether HMRC should have opened a separate enquiry under TMA 1970 Sch 1A in order to challenge the claim for carry back loss relief.
The UT found that Spring Salmon’s argument was flawed in dividing the terminal loss...
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:
