Mr & Mrs Tapsell & Mr Lester (as Partnership "The Granleys" v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Decision date: 8 June 2011
Neutral citation: [2011] UKFTT 376 (TC)
Overall AI summary confidence: medium
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: medium
The Granleys appealed HMRC’s amendment disallowing £106,014 of claimed capital allowances after their December 2003 purchase of The Haven. The Tribunal held the appellants bore the burden of proving the vendors had not already claimed allowances and, on the balance of probabilities, found the vendors likely had claimed, so the appellants’ claim was disallowed and the appeal dismissed.
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: medium
The purchaser challenging an HMRC amendment under TMA s28B must prove that a prior owner did not make capital allowance claims; if a prior owner has claimed, the purchaser’s qualifying expenditure can be limited (for example by provisions such as s185 CAA 2001) to the disposal value the prior owner brought into account.
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: low
The Tribunal suggested purchasers need not treat sale-agreement apportionments as conclusive in the absence of other evidence, and noted that tax advisers who gather vendor information but do not confirm vendors’ intentions or disposal figures may leave purchasers unable to rely on additional claimed allowances.