Tax Appeals Commission Determinations
Published 31 March - 15 April 2021
Case reference |
Tax head |
Legislation |
Case stated requested |
Matter under determination |
Income tax |
Section 865 TCA 1997 |
Unknown |
The Appellant submitted his 2012 income tax return in December 2016. The return initially included pre-populated pay and tax details, which were accidentally excluded due to the Appellant’s unfamiliarity with Revenue’s IT system. The Appellant subsequently informed Revenue of his income and tax deductions from PAYE sources for 2012 in January 2018 and was issued with a notice of amended assessment indicating an overpayment. Revenue declined to process the repayment due to the claim being outside the four-year time limit. The Appeal Commissioner determined that he did not have discretion on the application of the statutory limitation period and that the Appellant’s claim was out of time in accordance with section 865(4) TCA 1997. |
|
CAT |
Section 10 Succession Act 1965 |
Unknown |
This appeal considered a claim for Dwelling House Relief for CAT purposes. The Appellant inherited the remainder interest in her parent’s house on the death of her mother who held a life interest in accordance with the will of her late father. The Appellant owned another house in negative interest when she took the remainder interest in her parent’s house which she lived in with her elderly mother for four years prior to her mother’s death. The Appellant submitted she inherited the house in 1987 as her father intended to leave a right of residence to her mother and full ownership to the Appellant and mistakenly referenced a life interest for her mother in the will. She also contended that as the house she owned was in negative interest, it was de facto owned by the mortgagor and so she was entitled to Dwelling House Relief. The Appeal Commissioner determined that the Appellant was not entitled to Dwelling House Relief and noted that the TAC does not have jurisdiction to determine whether a legislative provision is unfair. |
|
Income tax |
Unknown |
Revenue declined to process the repayment of tax for 2014 as the Appellant had filed his return in early 2020 and the claim was not made within the four-year limitation period. The Appeal Commissioner determined that he did not have discretion on the application of the statutory limitation period and that the Appellant’s claim was out of time in accordance with section 865(4) TCA 1997. |
||
Income tax – Artists’ exemption |
Unknown |
The Appellant’s claim for the artist exemption was refused by Revenue on the basis that it was unable to determine if the Appellant’s play came within any category listed in section 195(1). Revenue considered the work an outline of directions and choreography for a play. Having considered the evidence, the Appeal Commissioner was satisfied that the work qualified as a play per section 195(1)(b) and that the test and criteria for exemption under the guidelines in force were also satisfied. The Appellant was determined to be entitled to avail of the artists’ exemption. |
||
Income tax – PSWT |
Unknown |
The Appellant filed amended tax returns in 2019 to claim a repayment of tax arising from PSWT incurred in 2013 and 2014. The Appellant had previously filed returns for those years but omitted PSWT. As the claim was made more than four years after the end of the chargeable periods that the claim relates to, the Appeal Commissioner determined that a repayment of tax for 2013 and 2014 was not allowed under section 865. |
||
Income tax |
Section 865 TCA 1997 |
Unknown |
The Appellant made a payment to Revenue in 2015 to cover any past or future tax liabilities, as he was undergoing cancer treatment and was not able to bring his returns up to date. The Appellant had brought his tax affairs up to date in 2020, with 2013 and 2014 returns showing tax repayments were due. Revenue submitted that the payment to cover future liabilities had not included specific instruction on the allocation of the payment and as such was allocated in full to his 2014 preliminary tax, as it remained unpaid and was the next return due when the money was received in 2015 and a payment for 2015 was not due at that time. The Appeal Commissioner found that the 2015 payment had been correctly allocated to 2014 and that there was no alternative but to determine that claim for repayment was out of time in accordance with section 865(4). |
|
Income tax |
Unknown |
The Appellant contended that a return filed outside the four-year limitation period which resulted in an overpayment of tax was filed late due to an error by his agent. The Appeal Commissioner noted that a tax return submitted by an agent under the authority of a chargeable person is considered to be submitted by the chargeable person and determined that claim for repayment was out of time in accordance with section 865(4). |
||
Income tax |
Section 983 TCA 1997 |
Unknown |
The Appeal Commissioner referenced a determination reached in 69TAC2020 and detailed that section 24(6) Companies (Amendment Act) 1990 overrides the provisions of the TCA 1997. Accordingly, Revenue was determined not to be entitled to raise an assessment denying the Appellant, a proprietary director, a credit for income tax deducted from his emoluments, but not remitted by the company he held a material interest in. The employer company had entered examinership and Revenue had agreed to the Examiner’s proposals for its debt to be included in a Compromise Scheme of Arrangement which was subsequently accepted by the Circuit Court. |
|
Income tax |
Unknown |
The Appeal Commissioner determined that a claim for a tax repayment for the year of assessment 2011 was out of time in accordance with the provisions of section 865(4) as the return was filed in 2018. This was despite the Appellants claims that business and financial hardship had prevented the timely submission of the return. |
||
PREM |
Unknown |
The Appellant is an airline pilot employed by an Irish airline but working in Germany and resident in the Netherlands. His employer deducts Irish PAYE from his salary in accordance with his contract of service. He appealed Revenue’s refusal to repay overpaid income tax on the basis that a claim had not been made within the four-year time limit. The Appellant submitted that the non-discrimination clause in Article 24 of the DTA between Ireland and the Netherlands provides that he should be entitled to a five-year claim period in Ireland as provided for in the Netherlands. However, the Appeal Commissioner detailed that Article 24 of the DTA ensures that a national of the Netherlands will not be treated differently to a national of Ireland for taxation purposes and does not extend the time limit in Ireland for valid tax repayment claims. The claim for repayment of tax was determined to be out of time under section 865. |
||
PAYE |
Section 865 TCA 1997 |
Unknown |
The Appellant made a tax payment in 2010 which he claimed to be in relation to his 2009 return submitted at the same time the payment was made. The Appellant re-submitted his 2009 return in 2017 as a refund of income tax for the 2014 tax year was being withheld pending the satisfactory completion of the 2009 return. The Appellant was unable to provide evidence of having previously submitted the 2009 return and could not give details on why he made a payment in December 2010 but believed he would not have done so without filing a return. Despite the extenuating circumstances put forward by the Appellant in relation to family illness, subsequent bereavement, and job redundancy, the Appeal Commissioner determined the claim for a repayment of tax for the 2009 tax year to be out of time. |
|
Income tax |
Unknown |
A repayment of tax arising on the filing of an income tax return which the Appellant thought had been filed on time by their accountants was denied by Revenue on the basis that the claim was made outside the four-year time limit for valid claims. Despite the Appellant being unaware of the non-filing of their returns, the Appeal Commissioner determined that the claim for repayment was out of time in accordance with section 865(4). |
