SHORT CASE REPORT FTT DECISION – EXCISE DUTY - Cantina Levorato SRL v. HMRC  UKFTT 461 (TC)
Cantina Levorato SRL v. HMRC
 UKFTT 461 (TC)
This decision of the FTT is interesting because:
- The Appellant was an Italian company that was assessed to a UK tax on the basis of HMRC’s allegation that certain “irregularities” for the purposes of excise duty legislation had occurred in the UK element of the supply chain. HMRC had issued a “Uniform Instrument Permitting Enforcement”, which was received by the Appellant from the Italian tax authorities. HMRC conceded (and the FTT ruled) that this did not constitute a notification for the purposes of s 12 FA 1994.
- The conclusion is different from several cases following Honig v Sarsfield,1 a Court of Appeal judgment that decided that the statutory time limit did not apply to the notice of the assessment. For example, in Cirko v HMRC,2 the FTT had upheld the assessment, concluding that the delay of the notification (two years after the assessment had been raised) had “no bearing on the validity of that assessment”. Here, the FTT reached the opposite conclusion.
- It is the first time that (as far as the authors are aware) the FTT has followed the test created by the Supreme Court in FMX Limited v HMRC3 to quash assessments. Based on EU law, the principle states that legal certainty requires that assessments are communicated within a “reasonable time”. Although the FTT had previously applied the test,4 it had (as far as the authors are aware) never invalidated an assessment based on it. In this case the FTT found that the four-year delay between the raising (2013) and notification (2017) of the assessment did not represent a “reasonable time”.
1  STC 246.
2  UKFTT 0482 (TC).
3  UKSC 1.
4 Mr Stephen J Mullens v HMRC  UKFTT 131 (TC).
Navigating Domicile Enquiries: Recent Case Review
In recent months, the First-tier Tax Tribunal has presided over 3 headline grabbing domicile cases which, whilst offering little precedential value, set out some useful commentary on the multi factorial approach taken by HMRC and ultimately the tribunal in determining an individual’s domicile status. This note reviews the decisions made in Shah v HMRC  UK FTT 539 (TC), Strachan v HMRC  UKFTT 00617 (TC) and Coller v HMRC  UKFTT 212 (TC).
Mini Umbrella Companies (“MUCs”) Success at Tribunal (Labour Supply; Kittel fraud; Fini fraud)
Iain MacWhannell, instructing David Bedenham, successfully represented an employment intermediary in an appeal against a denial of input tax and £15 million VAT assessment.
The End is Nigh for the Non-Dom Regime
Published in ThoughtLeaders4 Private Client Magazine, Helen McGhee expert analysis of the current state of non-dom tax regime and it's future.
HMRC Makes Changes to COP9
On 14 June 2023, HMRC published a substantially rewritten Code of Practice 9 (“COP9”). Helen McGhee and Megan Durnford set out the key changes implemented as a result of this publication.
Pandora Papers: HMRC issues nudge letters
The Pandora Papers leak of almost 12m documents back in 2021 purportedly exposed the secret accounts and dealings (including potential tax evasion/ avoidance and money laundering) of 35 world leaders (including the late HM Elizabeth II), as well as many politicians and billionaires. The data was obtained by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists in Washington DC and led to one of the biggest ever global financial investigations.