Scott Knight v The Commissioners for HMRC

Decision date: 22 July 2026

Neutral citation: [2026] UKFTT 1087 (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 appeal concerns a 5 April 2024 closure notice assessing £194,272.40 CGT for 2020/21 after a £986,412.60 capital distribution from Dirty Harry's liquidation was omitted from Mr Knight's return. HMRC sought to strike out parts of the appeal; the Tribunal refused to strike out the challenge to entitlement to Business Asset Disposal Relief (BADR) but struck out reliance on the brother's BADR and the pleaded duplication with a 2017/18 closure notice, deferring determination of quantum to the substantive hearing. Directions were given for further particulars on the BADR issue and for HMRC to file or amend their statement of case.

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 treated the "matter in question" as defined by the closure notice read in context, concluding that entitlement to BADR was within that matter and therefore properly for the Tribunal to decide; where the validity of a claimed relief requires fuller argument and evidence, strike-out is inappropriate and the point should proceed to a substantive hearing.

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 Tribunal observed that subsequent discussion can illuminate but cannot retrospectively expand the scope of the "matter in question" in a closure notice, and noted that reliance on the tax treatment of another taxpayer (here, the appellant's brother) is generally too remote to establish entitlement to a relief on the appellant's own appeal.