Market leading insight for tax experts
View online issue

Tax procedure’s dead parrot: staleness and stare decisis

Craig Kirkham-Wilson (Simmons & Simmons) reviews a recent decision of the Upper Tribunal on staleness and Supreme Court precedent.

Section 29 of TMA 1970 permits HMRC on discovering an under-assessment of income or capital gains tax by an individual to assess the individual to tax on the shortfall. In HMRC v Tooth [2019] EWCA Civ 926 the Court of Appeal endorsed the frequently-put argument that a discovery requires an element of ‘newness’ and that if the assessment is not issued ‘within a reasonable period after’ the discovery is made it might no longer be said to be a ‘discovery’ at all because it lacks that ‘newness’.

Yet ‘staleness’ was not the only issue in the Tooth proceedings. On appeal ([2021] UKSC 17) (‘Tooth SC’) the Supreme Court decided that there had been no deliberate inaccuracy in the taxpayer’s return. Staleness strictly ...

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:

Alternatively, you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this article in full.
Please reach out to customer services at +44 (0) 330 161 1234 or 'customer.services@lexisnexis.co.uk' for further assistance.
EDITOR'S PICKstar
Top