header-logo header-logo

Parallel proceedings

25 March 2010 / Jamie Potter , Charles Brasted
Issue: 7410 / Categories: Features , Tax
printer mail-detail

Tax challenges: why so taxing? ask Charles Brasted & Jamie Potter

The long-understood need for parallel proceedings arises from the limited statutory jurisdiction of the tribunal(s) empowered to hear appeals from the decisions of HMRC. The jurisdiction of the relatively new First Tier Tribunal (the FTT) is constrained in the same manner as its predecessor bodies (in the case of tax, the VAT and Duties Tribunal and the Special Commissioners for Income Tax). Thus, for example, s 83 of the Value Added Tax Act 1994 (VATA) sets out an (almost) exhaustive list of the matters appealable to the FTT in relation to VAT.

A difficulty, however, arises in circumstances where a taxpayer wishes to complain about, not just the application of the law by HMRC in relation to his tax matters, but also HMRC’s conduct in reaching its decision—that is, the taxpayer wishes to argue that irrespective of (or more usually, despite) the application of the law, HMRC’s decision should be struck down as being unreasonable, irrational or contrary to the taxpayer’s legitimate expectation

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll