Timothy David Hanlin v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Decision date: 28 March 2011

Neutral citation: [2011] UKFTT 213 (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 HMRC adjustments disallowing the appellant's claimed travel, overnight accommodation and meal expenses for 2006–07 and 2007–08, and related turnover/CIS adjustments. The First-tier Tribunal found the expenses were not incurred "wholly and exclusively" for the trade because the taxpayer's base of operations was the Dungeness site, not his home, and no identifiable deductible proportion or supporting evidence was shown. The Tribunal upheld HMRC's amendments and dismissed the appeal.

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 decision applies the statutory "wholly and exclusively" test under s 34 ITTOIA 2005 and confirms that travel between home and a regular workplace is generally private and not deductible, unless the taxpayer's home is the base of operations or exceptional facts displace that presumption; accommodation and subsistence follow the same principle and are deductible only where nights away from the taxpayer's normal workplace are necessitated by business.

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 judgment notes (obiter) that authorities on what constitutes a "base of operations" are fact-sensitive and that analogies and examples (such as emergency call-outs or other unusual circumstances where travel starts or ends at home) can illustrate occasions when travel starting/ending at home might be deductible, but such examples do not override the statutory test.

Warning

Chunk contains substantial repetition and duplicated passages. Notes contain substantial repetition and duplicated passages.

Source links

Judgment page Judgment PDF Judgment XML