Tax

Eccles v Revenue & Customs (CAPITAL GAINS TAX/TAXATION OF CHARGEABLE GAINS : Exemptions and reliefs)

[2019] UKFTT TC TC06978First-tier Tribunal (Tax)2019

Get the AI brief for this case

Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.

Quick orient — first passages from judgment

Was a payment made by the Appellant towards a company's indebtedness made 'under a guarantee' - Yes - Did the Appellant control the money which was the source of the payment? - Yes - When did the allowable loss arise? - When the payment was made under the personal guarantee, which was in March 2012 - Loss cannot be carried back to earlier years - Appeal dismissed

Sitting in public at Tribunal Hearing Centre, 2nd Floor, Chichester Street, Belfast BT1 3JF on 14 January 2019

This appeal challenges Closure Notices issued by HMRC against Mr Eccles under sections 28A(1) and (2) of the Taxes Management Act 1970 in relation to two successive financial years:

There are several Notices of Appeal. Insofar as any Notice of Appeal was filed out of time, and permission is needed, this is not opposed by HMRC, and I give it.�

For 2009/10, HMRC received Mr Eccles' self-assessment return (timeously) on 19 January 2011 and opened an (in-time) inquiry under section 9A of the Taxes Management Act 1970 on 1 December 2011.

Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.

Read the full judgment elsewhere

Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.

More Tax cases

Wood & Anor v Revenue and Customs (Stamp Duty Land Tax - rate of SDLT applicable - whether Table A or Table B - whether the house and land included land that was not residential property - whether all of land was, or formed part of, grounds of house - Finance Act 2003, ss 55, 116)

[2026] UKFTT TC 265

New Claire Wine Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Discovery assessments - extended time limit assessments - penalty for inaccuracy in a return - deliberate inaccuracy - whether deliberate inaccuracy necessarily involves dishonesty - whether HMRC required to specifically plead and prove dishonesty - whether the FTT erred in failing to explain how the appellant's conduct might not involve dishonesty)

[2026] UKUT TCC 116

Trees v Revenue and Customs (VAT - penalties - director's liability notice (DLN) - section 60 and 61 VATA 1994 - Kittel appeal in 2020 - HMRC expressly not pleading dishonesty)

[2026] UKUT TCC 92

Alesen Direct Solutions Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Company undertaking construction work; VAT assessment; hardship application; company made advances to related entities/persons; hardship denied)

[2026] UKFTT TC 398

Rodrigues v Revenue and Customs

[2026] UKUT TCC 75

Lawrence Rawlinson v The Commissioners for HMRC

[2026] UKFTT 45 (TC)

Common Room

Discussion

0 comments · About the Common Room →

No comments yet — start the discussion.

Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.

This case is reproduced verbatim from the public judgment published by The National Archives under the UK Government's Open Government Licence v3.0. If you appear in this case and believe it should not be published — for example because your conviction was quashed on appeal, you have statutory anonymity, or for other privacy reasons — request removal here.

Tax