Dass v Special Commissioner and Others
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Lightman |
| Judgment Date | 13 October 2006 |
| Neutral Citation | [2006] EWHC 2491 (Ch) |
| Court | Chancery Division |
| Date | 13 October 2006 |
| Docket Number | Case No: CH/2006/APP/0538 |
[2006] EWHC 2491 (Ch)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
CHANCERY DIVISION
Mr Justice Lightman
Case No: CH/2006/APP/0538
Mr Dass appeared in person
Miss Diya Sen Gupta (instructed by the Solicitor of The Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs) for the Second Respondent
The First and Third Respondents were not represented and did not attend
Hearing date: 3 rd October 2006
INTRODUCTION
This is an appeal by Mr Dass (acting in person) against a decision ("the Decision") of the Special Commissioner Mr Howard Nowlan ("the Commissioner") dismissing an appeal by Mr Dass from a decision of the Inspector of Taxes. The decision of the Inspector of Taxes was to disallow Mr Dass relief of £46 in respect of the payment of fees of £200 expenditure in 1998 as the enrolment fee for an examination in a part time two year course at Holborn College leading to a LL Dip Qualification. Mr Dass had applied for relief on the grounds that the fees qualified for vocational training relief under section 32 of the Finance Act 1991 or as a trading expense under Schedule D of the Taxes Act 1988.
The evidence before the Commissioner included a witness statement by Mr Dass and an agreed statement of facts. There was no cross-examination and no request for cross-examination.
The relevant facts are set out in paragraphs 3–8 of the Decision which (so far as material) read as follows:
"Mr Dass traded as a tutor in English and as an adviser in relation to the bringing of appeals before various tribunals. In or around 1997 he embarked on a course with Holborn College. This course was a part-time two-year course and would have led to an LL Dip Qualification had Mr Dass been able to take the examinations and pass them. As it was, although he twice enrolled for the examinations, he was unwell on both occasions and so was unable to sit the examinations, though he still incurred the cost of the examination fees of £200 in both 1998 and 1999.
In his own words, the description of his trade and activities prior to enrolling on the Holborn course was as follows. 'My services included moderation and examination in English, translation and word processing, settling and marking of written and oral exams, reporting any malpractice of examination regulations, also admin and evaluation work, producing examination reports'. It also included 'Giving advice and guidance to clients about statutory and human rights; self-assessment, personal development, presentation and communication skills, drafting witness statements and complaints, advice about dealing with discriminatory and detrimental treatment with reference to payment, pay advice, promotion, equal opportunities in the field of education, employment and training; taking notes, acting as a witness, making representations at a tribunal'.
In describing the Holborn course, Mr Dass said that 'the LL Dip Studies improved my communication and analytical skills. It also widened my knowledge about reasoning, contractual rights, obligations, breach of contract, human rights, legal principles and administrative law. This course would ultimately broaden my options by enabling me to teach law in Access Courses in FE and help individuals with their studies, jobs, work experience and career progression in further and higher education. The LL Dip Qualification would enable me to motivate bilingual students to choose legal careers. It would help me to analyse various problems people face in full and part time education, employment and training and to draw up action plans to resolve those problems. It would also enable me to advocate their cases in respective tribunals and Exam Boards'.
HMRC described the Holborn course as a 'bridging course' towards becoming a solicitor. Although Mr...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Phillips
...of 14 June 2018 the reviewing officer relied on the authority of the High Court decision of Lightman J in Dass v Special Commissioner [2006] BTC 866. In that case the taxpayer traded as a tutor in English and as an adviser in relation to the bringing of appeals before various tribunals. He ......