Skip to content
Solved
SearchBrowse
Sign in

Contents

Official guidance
VAT Assessments and Error Correction

VAEC1400 · Powers of assessment: Best judgement: Contents page

  • VAEC1410 · Powers of assessment: Best judgement: The law
  • VAEC1420 · Powers of assessment: Best judgement: Definition
  • VAEC1430 · Power of assessment: Best judgement: How it is determined by tribunal
  • VAEC1431 · Power of assessment: Best judgement: Convincing a tribunal
  • VAEC1440 · Power of assessment: Best judgement: Partial breach of requirements
  • VAEC1450 · Power of assessment: Best judgement: Lack of information
  • VAEC1460 · Power of assessment: Best judgement: General principles for calculating arrears
  • VAEC1470 · Power of assessment: Best judgement: Calculating arrears using observations
  • VAEC1480 · Power of assessment: Best judgement: Calculating arrears using invigilation
  • VAEC1490 · Power of assessment: Best judgement: Calculating arrears using mark-up
  • VAEC1500 · Power of assessment: Best judgement: Other methods used to calculate arrears
  • VAEC1510 · Power of assessment: Best judgement: Determine the overall credibility of your assessment
  • VAEC1520 · Power of assessment: Best judgement: Some remedies for invalid assessments
  • VAEC1530 · Power of assessment: Best judgement: Prime assessments
  • VAEC1540 · Power of assessment: Best judgement: Helpful pointers
  • VAEC1550 · Power of assessment: Best judgement: Consistency with direct taxes assessments
  1. Powers of assessment: Best judgement: Contents page
  2. Power of assessment: Best judgement: Lack of information

VAEC1450 | Power of assessment: Best judgement: Lack of information

From HM Revenue & Customs · VAT Assessments and Error Correction

You may encounter difficulty when trying to make an assessment to best judgement.

If a business is unable or unwilling to provide all the information you would like or has not kept comprehensive records, you would be fully justified in raising an assessment.

This may include higher range estimates, see Spillane v HMC&E 1990 STC 212.

If the amount of the assessment is disputed then the onus is on the business to disprove the assessment, perhaps by providing further information or reconstructing its records.

In the Van Boeckel case the High Court held that although the Commissioners had to exercise their judgement as to the amount of the assessment in a reasonable manner, they were under no obligation to do the work of the taxpayer by carrying out exhaustive investigations.

In a colourful analysis on the same theme, the High Court in the Schlumberger Inland Services Inc. [1987] STC 228 case considered that, where a business provides only the minimum of information to the Commissioners, the officer raising the assessment

‘… is not required to possess and deploy the deductive powers of Sherlock Holmes and the clairvoyance of Madam Arcarti provided that the assessment raised is not in excess of what could reasonably be payable.’

PreviousNext
PrivacyTerms