Just like the First-tier Tribunal, the jurisdiction of the Upper Tribunal encompasses both direct and indirect taxes.

Direct taxes include:

• Corporation tax
• Income tax
• Capital Gains Tax
• Inheritance Tax
• National Insurance Contributions
• Stamp taxes (Stamp Duty and
• Stamp Duty Land Tax)
• Income tax collected under PAYE
• Construction industry scheme (CIS)

Indirect taxes include:

• VAT
• Insurance Premium tax
• Landfill tax
• Climate Change levy
• Aggregates levy
• Excise duty

There are strict time limits to appeal a tribunal decision, so you should seek specialist legal advice and act quickly.

In tax cases, you must ask the First-tier Tribunal for permission within 56 days of the date on the decision letter. It is rare for the First-tier Tribunal to grant permission. If the tribunal refuses, you can ask the Upper Tribunal to give you permission. You must do this within one month of the letter of refusal being sent by the First-tier Tribunal.

If permission is granted, the tax appeal is usually heard by two judges. The panel may comprise two judges of the Upper Tribunal, or one judge of the Upper Tribunal and a High Court judge who is authorised to hear appeals in the Upper Tribunal.

At the hearing, your barrister will present your case and the tribunal will decide which party wins the case. It is not an immediate decision though and you will normally be told the outcome of the case within 3 months of the hearing.

Hickey & Co Solicitors principal, Julian Hickey, has considerable experience of advising on and assisting in the preparation for a tax appeal in the Upper Tribunal. His breadth and depth of advocacy experience before the Upper Tribunal is demonstrated by the following cases:

• Corporation Tax – whether certain companies were resident outside the United Kingdom – residence outside the United Kingdom essential for tax planning – the test for “residence”: Development Securities Plc v HMRC: (bailii.org)
• Stamp Duty Land Tax – withdrawal of appeals by appellant- HMRC informing Tribunal of objection – no direct notification by HMRC to taxpayer – whether valid notice given by para 37 Sch 10 FA 2003– whether FTT erred in application of para 42 Sch 10 FA 2003 and in failing to exercise discretion under Rule 5 to bring proceedings to an end: Albert House Property PCC Ltd v HMRC 373.pdf (bailii.org)
• Annual Tax on Enveloped Dwellings – case considered whether the appellant was carrying on a trade – no – appeal dismissed: Hopscotch Ltd v HM Revenue (DWELLINGS – whether appellant carrying on a trade – no) [2020] UKUT 294 (TCC) (29 October 2020) (bailii.org))
• Procedure – First-tier Tribunal refusal to direct HMRC to disclose documents relating to the mutual agreement procedure with the Belgian competent authority under the UK/Belgium double tax treaty – consideration of “relevance” of documents: McCabe v HM Revenue (Tax) [2020] UKUT 266 (TCC) (21 September 2020) (https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/TCC/2020/266.html)
• Advance Petroleum Revenue Tax – Petroleum Revenue Tax – whether carry back of PRT resulted in a repayment of APRT – whether right to interest: MCX Dunlin (UK) Ltd v Revenue And Customs [2020] EWHC 11 (Ch) (13 January 2020) (https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2020/11.html)
• Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) – Project Blue scheme – enquiries into land transaction returns – FA 2003, Sch 10 – applications for closure notices – refused by the First-tier Tribunal, [2016] UKFTT 558 (TC), on ground that HMRC had not been provided with information and documents – provision of information and documents in sample cases – invitations to settle. Microsoft Word – Frosh_full decision UT.doc (bailii.org)
• Value Added Tax (VAT) – tripartite situation – car hire company arranging for repair of third parties’ vehicles damaged in collisions with hired cars – whether car hire company entitled to recover VAT on car repair invoices – Airtours Holiday Transport Ltd v HMRC applied – whether economic reality inconsistent with contractual position: U-Drive Ltd v Revenue and Customs (VALUE ADDED TAX) [2017] UKUT 112 (TCC) (17 March 2017) (https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKUT/TCC/2017/112.html)
• Disclosure – Specific disclosure in the High Court and challenge to HMRC claim to public interest immunity: Reporting Restrictions Apply
• Value Added Tax (VAT) – claim to legitimate expectation relying on BB 18/06 as to why the claimant had not claimed VAT from its customers on charges paid by customers: Travel Republic Limited v Her Majestys Revenue And Customs [2018] EWHC 3905 (Admin) https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2010/1151.html

HMRC has access to a considerable volume of information which enables them to identify potential errors in a tax return and/or the failure to pay the correct amount of tax. These sources of information include:

• “Connect”, which is an IT program that sifts information, coverings details of bank interest, credit card data, DVLA and Land Registry reports relating to individuals and companies
• HMRC data gathering powers under Finance Act 2011, Sch. 23
  • HMRC has acquired the right to force apps and platforms such as Apple, Amazon and Airbnb to hand over data — including names and addresses of sellers and advertisers
  • Payment providers such as PayPal are another source of data
• International co-operation: information provided by non-UK tax authorities under tax treaties or other exchange of information agreements (e.g. see IEIM300000 – International Exchange of Information Manual – HMRC internal manual – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk))
• Informants
• Information Leaks
  • “Panama” papers
  • “Paradise” papers
• Suspicious activity reports (SARs) under the anti-money laundering legislation
• If a bank or professional adviser has any suspicion that a customer might be involved in money laundering or terrorist financing, they are obliged to alert law enforcement agencies
• Common Reporting Standard (the “CRS”) which came into effect in 2018 and provides HMRC with more information on offshore accounts