Dennis Lucas v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 12 June 2025
Neutral citation: [2025] UKFTT 702 (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
This appeal concerned HMRC discovery assessments for 2016/17–2020/21 arising from expense and uniform rebate claims submitted by Apostle Accounting Ltd for Mr Lucas. The Tribunal found Apostle acted on Mr Lucas's behalf when it submitted the returns, that HMRC only had the returns available at the end of the enquiry windows so s29(5) permitted discovery assessments, and that Apostle deliberately brought about the loss of tax such that the extended time limits under s36 TMA applied; the appeal was 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 Tribunal treated authorisation of an agent to claim a rebate and approval by the taxpayer of the claimed figure as sufficient for the agent to be regarded as acting "on behalf of" the taxpayer when submitting returns; where only the taxpayer's (or agent's) returns have been made available to HMRC at the close of the enquiry window and those returns do not disclose the insufficiency, s29(5) can justify discovery assessments; and deliberate conduct by an agent acting on behalf of the taxpayer can engage the extended assessment period under s36 TMA.
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 expressed sympathy for taxpayers misled by unscrupulous agents but indicated such sympathy does not alter statutory consequences where the agent acted deliberately; it also suggested that large-scale commercial schemes by agents may be relevant evidence of the agent's state of mind and culpability.
Warning
- The chunk includes substantial duplicated text; the core findings are consistent despite repetition. Notes contain duplicated passages and are limited to a single chunk; they may be incomplete.