Commentary

V5.132C VAT assessment—'best judgement'

Part V5 Compliance, enforcement and appeals

V5.132C VAT assessment—'best judgement'

V5.132C VAT assessment—'best judgement'

In the majority of cases, HMRC is required to assess tax due 'to the best of their judgement'. The same test is applied where HMRC attributes tax to one or more prescribed accounting periods for the purpose of calculating penalties, interest or default surcharge1. The burden of showing that an assessment has not been made to the best of HMRC's judgement falls on the taxpayer. In Mr Chun Wah Lok (also known as Mr Daniel Lok) (trading as 'new Lane House Fish And Chips') v HMRC [2017] UKFTT 169 (TC), TC05661, the First-tier Tribunal reminded itself of the guidance in relation to the burden of proof given in Re B (Children) (Care Proceedings: Standard of Proof) [2008] UKHL 35: 'If a legal rule requires a fact to be proved (a “fact in issue”) a judge or jury must decide whether or not it happened. There is no room for a finding that it might not have happened. The law operates a binary system in which the only values are zero and one. The fact either happened or it did not. If the tribunal is left in doubt, the doubt is resolved by a rule that one party or the other carries the burden of proof. If the party who bears the burden of proof fails to discharge it, a value of zero is returned and the fact is treated as not having happened. If he does discharge it, a value of one is returned and the

To continue reading
View the latest version of this document, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to TolleyLibrary or register for a free trial