Judicial review (JR) applications against HMRC remain an important tool in the taxpayer armoury and is appropriate where tribunal litigation is not available. The recent review into JR by Lord Faulks QC has done little to reduce the scope of appropriate challenges. As well as recent successful JRs against HMRC in the courts (and even the Supreme Court in R (oao) Haworth), public law defences can successfully be employed to persuade HMRC to withdraw ill-founded assessments or even not to issue them at all. Procedural rules will always be important.
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
Judicial review (JR) applications against HMRC remain an important tool in the taxpayer armoury and is appropriate where tribunal litigation is not available. The recent review into JR by Lord Faulks QC has done little to reduce the scope of appropriate challenges. As well as recent successful JRs against HMRC in the courts (and even the Supreme Court in R (oao) Haworth), public law defences can successfully be employed to persuade HMRC to withdraw ill-founded assessments or even not to issue them at all. Procedural rules will always be important.
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
