Bangla Lounge (Harborne) & Anor v The Commissioners for HMRC

Decision date: 12 September 2024

Neutral citation: [2024] UKFTT 831 (TC)

Overall AI summary confidence: medium

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: medium

This case concerned two restaurant partnerships appealing HMRC best-judgement VAT assessments (and seeking late appeals against Schedule 24 penalties) based on Test Eat visits and Drinks-to-Total checks. The Tribunal found HMRC's best-judgement assessments were in substance properly based on material and applied honestly and reasonably, dismissed applications to amend grounds to argue time-bar and to admit late penalty appeals, reduced the First Appellant's assessment only to reflect an adjusted Test Eat customer count, and upheld the Second Appellant's assessment as revised by HMRC.

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 applied that a proposed amendment to grounds will only be permitted if it has real prospects of success; an assessing officer may reasonably delay issuing a best-judgement assessment to allow a taxpayer or adviser to provide information without rendering the assessment out of time; and a best-judgement assessment must be founded on some material and applied honestly and reasonably — mere disagreement over the figures does not by itself make an assessment spurious.

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 noted that where Test Eat reports lack entry times for certain intervals there can be a risk of double-counting warranting adjustment; parties should not introduce fresh documents at the hearing without explanation; and appellants faced with estimated assessments must produce positive evidence of correct figures rather than bare assertions.

Warning

- none

Source links

Judgment page Judgment PDF Judgment XML