John Johnstone v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Decision date: 17 January 2011

Neutral citation: [2011] UKFTT 57 (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 concerned whether income from an Imperial Homes contract belonged to Kinnera Homes Ltd or to John Johnstone as a sole trader and whether Johnstone had produced sufficient records to rebut HMRC's assessment of £14,214. The Tribunal found invoices and payments were made to Johnstone personally, no contract or paperwork showed Kinnera carried out the work, and Johnstone's poor/haphazard records meant he did not rebut the assessment. The HMRC assessment was upheld 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: high

The Tribunal's applicable ratio is that a taxpayer's unimplemented intention to have a company carry out work, without documentary or other evidential proof that the company legally performed the transaction, is insufficient to attribute receipts to the company; taxpayers must keep requisite records to enable correct tax returns, and lack of such records undermines attempts to rebut assessments.

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 decision contains obiter observations that personal illness causing poor record-keeping may attract sympathy but does not remove statutory record-keeping obligations, and that local practice of verbal agreements does not excuse the need for proper documentary records to support tax treatment.

Warning

This chunk contains repeated and partly duplicated text, which made extraction of a single concise narrative necessary. Notes contain repeated and partly duplicated text; some detail was condensed from overlapping passages.