Olufemi Salami v The Commissioners for HMRC

Decision date: 2 October 2026

Neutral citation: [2026] UKFTT 1380 (TC)

Overall AI summary confidence: high

AI Notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary or obiter dicta summary shown on this page is AI-generated, provided only to help users assess potential relevance more quickly, and may be wholly inaccurate. No liability is accepted for the accuracy of any such summary, regardless of any AI confidence rating shown. Users should check the underlying decision and obtain appropriate legal advice rather than relying on any summary.

Short overview

This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.

AI confidence in this short overview: high

This case concerns Mr Olufemi Salami's appeal against an HMRC assessment withdrawing EIS income tax relief after HMRC notified the company its shares were not EIS-eligible. The First-tier Tribunal struck the appeal out for want of jurisdiction, holding that challenges to HMRC's conduct and procedural fairness fall outside the Tribunal's statutory remit under s235 ITA and must be pursued, if at all, by other means. The Tribunal did not decide HMRC's alternative submission that the appeal had no reasonable prospects.

Ratio decidendi

This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.

AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: high

The Tribunal’s ratio is that where primary legislation (here s235 ITA) prescribes the making of an assessment and a statutory appeal route, the First-tier Tribunal is confined to that statutory remit and does not have jurisdiction to entertain complaints about HMRC’s conduct, procedural fairness or common-law judicial-review-type challenges to the assessment.

Obiter dicta

This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.

AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium

The judgment expressed sympathy for the appellant’s circumstances and relied on Upper Tribunal authority to the effect that the First-tier Tribunal lacks judicial review jurisdiction; those remarks are ancillary to the decision and do not form binding ratio.

Warning

The chunk contains repetitive passages and duplicated text. The notes indicate duplication and repetition; they appear to capture the Tribunal’s reasoning but may omit full procedural detail. None

Source links

Judgment page Judgment PDF Judgment XML