Flooring Limited v The Commissioners for HMRC

Decision date: 9 May 2025

Neutral citation: [2025] UKFTT 526 (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

KNR Flooring Limited appealed HMRC assessments seeking recovery of alleged overclaimed CJRS payments for two directors, disputing whether their reference salary was £512 (per RTI data) or £2,952 (KNR’s case). The Tribunal found the RTI submission of 19 March 2020 showing £512 to be determinative and concluded KNR had not proved, on the balance of probabilities, that the higher salary took effect before the relevant CJRS date. The Tribunal also held it lacked jurisdiction to entertain a freestanding legitimate expectation argument and dismissed the appeal, upholding assessments totalling £49,874.67.

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

Where a timely RTI submission records a particular salary for the latest pay period ending on or before the relevant CJRS date, that RTI figure determines the reference salary for CJRS purposes unless persuasive contemporaneous documentary evidence establishes a different payable salary; the appellant bears the evidential burden to prove any earlier change in regular salary not reflected in RTI.

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 HMRC’s Business Objects extract can be relied on as a representation of RTI/PAYE data when it is fed by time-stamped underlying submissions, and that NICs figures or end-of-year summaries may be less probative of the timing of a salary change for CJRS purposes than contemporaneous RTI submissions.