Louise Duncan v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 7 August 2023
Neutral citation: [2023] UKFTT 697 (TC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
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 an application for permission to bring a nearly four-year-late appeal against a HMRC closure notice amending the appellant’s 2016/17 self-assessment to include omitted employment income. The Tribunal applied the Martland three-stage test, found the delay was serious and that the appellant's reasons did not outweigh it, refused permission to appeal late, and held that even if permission had been granted the substantive appeal would have failed because the omitted income plainly should have been included.
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 a long unexplained delay (nearly four years) in seeking to challenge a closure notice as a serious and significant factor against granting permission to appeal out of time, and concluded that where omitted income is undisputed and plainly should have been included, a substantive appeal against an amendment will fail.
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 suggested tribunals may consider whether HMRC should exercise care and management powers to waive interest and penalties in cases where HMRC administrative actions (such as tax code changes) have produced confusing or disproportionate consequences for a taxpayer. The Tribunal also applied the Martland three-stage approach as the appropriate test for permission to appeal out of time.