Farshad Khalili-Motlagh t/a Borge Restaurant v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 19 June 2024
Neutral citation: [2024] UKFTT 541 (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 HMRC assessments recovering alleged CJRS overpayments, with the appellant disputing £2,810.08 of the total. The Tribunal found on the balance of probabilities that the appellant's contemporaneous evidence established higher reference salaries for three employees than HMRC's RTI figures and allowed the appeal to that extent. The Tribunal also held that RTI figures are not necessarily definitive for quantifying CJRS payments under paragraph 7.2.
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
Where credible contemporaneous evidence (including witness statements and messages) shows RTI-reported pay is inaccurate, the correct reference salary for quantifying CJRS under paragraph 7.2 may be the amount actually paid rather than the RTI figure; paragraph 5 may determine eligibility by RTI inclusion, but paragraph 7.2 governs quantification by reference to actual pay.
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 admitting non‑RTI evidence to correct RTI errors does not inherently expose the scheme to fraud, noting that RTI submissions themselves can be amended and are not immune from error. The decision also distinguished previous commentary suggesting RTI fixes salary from binding employers to RTI mistakes.