Abdul Kadir (t/a Spice Garden Indian Cuisine) v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 16 December 2024
Neutral citation: [2024] UKFTT 1124 (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 appeal concerned a best-of-judgment VAT assessment of £176,249 (periods 04/08–01/16) and a Schedule 24 inaccuracy penalty initially assessed at £90,960.80. The Tribunal upheld HMRC’s assessment as properly made to the best of their judgment and within time, finding the appellant had not produced cogent contemporaneous evidence to displace it. The Tribunal found the inaccuracies deliberate but reduced the penalty to £85,275.75 and dismissed the appeal against the assessment while allowing the penalty appeal in part.
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 governing proposition as that a best-of-judgment assessment will be upheld where HMRC has fairly considered available material, made an honest and genuine attempt to form a judgment, and the taxpayer fails to produce cogent evidence to displace that assessment. The Tribunal also treated the one-year timing under s.73(6) as running from when HMRC had, and had digested, the last piece of evidence they relied upon.
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 commented on its limited jurisdiction to challenge HMRC conduct and rejected late-raised arguments about the legality of HMRC’s unannounced Visits; it also remarked that HMRC should ensure penalty pleadings and calculations accurately reflect the quantum relied upon.