Upper Tribunal Refuses Appeal in Entrepreneur's Relief Dispute

Background

The case of Frances Delaney against the Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC) was a significant legal battle over tax relief. The dispute centered on Delaney's claim for Entrepreneur's Relief on capital gains tax following the sale of her nursery school business to a company she solely owned. The relief would have reduced her tax rate from 28% to 10%, potentially saving her £196,902.

First-tier Tribunal Decision

The First-tier Tribunal (FTT) initially heard the case and ruled against Delaney, concluding that the contract for the business sale was not made before the critical date of 3 December 2014, as required by the Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992. Delaney's subsequent request for permission to appeal was denied by the FTT, prompting her to apply to the Upper Tribunal.

Upper Tribunal Proceedings

The Upper Tribunal, led by Judge Swami Raghavan, reviewed the case. Delaney, represented by her partner, Mr. Roaul Downey, argued that the FTT had erred in its application of the burden of proof and in its interpretation of the contract requirements under the relevant tax legislation.

Grounds of Appeal

Delaney's appeal was based on several grounds, including the argument that the FTT wrongly focused on the burden of proof rather than the factual evidence of the case. She contended that the FTT should have found an implied contract existed before the cut-off date, based on her business actions.

Upper Tribunal's Analysis

Judge Raghavan dismissed these arguments, stating that the FTT had appropriately evaluated the evidence and applied the correct legal principles. The Upper Tribunal emphasized that the burden of proof lay with Delaney to demonstrate that an earlier contract had been made, which she failed to do.

Legal Principles

The Tribunal reaffirmed that an appeal could only succeed on a point of law, not merely on factual disagreements. The decision highlighted the importance of clear evidence in tax relief claims, particularly when relying on implied contracts.

Conclusion

The Upper Tribunal's decision to refuse Delaney's appeal underscores the rigorous standards applied in tax cases, particularly concerning Entrepreneur's Relief. The case serves as a cautionary tale for business owners seeking similar tax advantages without definitive contractual evidence.

Learn More

For more information on tax law and related disputes, see BeCivil's guide to UK Tax Law.

Copyright & permissions