Buckley said ‘Mr D’ was entitled to the factual information which made up the bulk of the report by the Taunton VAT Office which handled his case – this after ‘Mr D’ had lost appeals to both the VAT Tribunal and to the High Court.
Customs had earlier refused on the ground that the report contained internal opinion, advice and recommendation.
But Buckley, who revealed the three-page report contained an account of the way the papers had been dealt with, an account of the background to the case and a review of the papers, as well as comment, opinion and advice, said there was no reason why ‘Mr D’ should not have an edited version.
He, however, ruled against an accountant’s request to see all the correspondence between the Adjudicator and the Inland Revenue relating to a complaint by ‘Mr and Mrs B’ about the way the Revenue had handled their affairs.
The Ombudsman said to do so would harm ‘frank and candid informal discussions’ between the Adjudicator’s staff and the Revenue – the Adjudicator had earlier ruled against the couple’s complaint.
Drastically fewer offices for HMRC in the hope to reduce their running costs
Tayabali Tomlin and d&t directors launch £20 a month TaxGo service, aiming to be the 'biggest UK firm' by client numbers
Companies must report on their complex financial structures including offshore accounts and notify HMRC
An examination by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has revealed serious concerns relating to HMRC’s plans