Mrs Deborah N Evelyn v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Decision date: 16 February 2011

Neutral citation: [2011] UKFTT 121 (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 a discovery assessment by HMRC disallowing business taper relief on a 2004 disposal of land that had been let on short-term "conacre" licences. The First-tier Tribunal held HMRC validly made a discovery assessment under TMA 1970 s29 because the Appellant failed to prove her error was made in accordance with a prevailing practice. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal and upheld the assessment increasing the tax due by £47,766.32 (of which £33,362.40 related to the disputed relief).

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 indicated that the s29(2) defence of error made "in accordance with the practice generally prevailing at the time" requires evidence of a practice that actually justified the specific error alleged: the practice must cover the precise factual circumstances, be relatively long‑established, readily ascertainable by interested parties, and accepted by HMRC and advisers; isolated instances or inconsistent handling do not suffice.

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 an isolated HMRC officer's acceptance (such as the earlier 2000/01 enquiry) does not by itself establish a prevailing practice, and that guidance like BIM55065 is not a blanket rule automatically treating all short grazing licences as trading—application depends on the statutory requirement of owner occupation for husbandry.