Fresh Sandwich Bar v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Decision date: 23 March 2011

Neutral citation: [2011] UKFTT 198 (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

Fresh Sandwich Bar appealed four Regulation 80 PAYE determinations for 2002/03–2005/06 made by HMRC after inadequate or inconsistent P46/PAYE records. The Tribunal held the officer had acted reasonably in making best-judgment determinations, refused the appeal generally, but allowed limited reductions where specific employees (Linda Rice from 24.06.02, Lynda Cordiner, Nicola Barclay and four Saturday-only workers) were positively identified and substantiated; the case was adjourned to quantify sums with RPI adjustments.

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 a taxpayer has failed to keep adequate records or produce verifiable employee information, an assessing officer’s Regulation 80 “best-judgment” PAYE determinations will stand if made reasonably on the material available; however, if particular employees can be positively identified and evidenced, limited reductions to such determinations should be made and quantified by reference to the available evidence.

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 endorsed applying prior “best judgment” guidance to focus on finding the correct tax amount rather than mounting general attacks on the officer’s judgment, and indicated that allegations of dishonesty against assessing officers must be specifically pleaded and particularised before cross-examination on such matters is permitted.

Warning

The chunk is repetitive and contains duplicated passages; care required when extracting unique points.

Source links

Judgment page Judgment PDF Judgment XML