Nicholson vs Morris (HM Inspector of Taxes) (1) (1973-1978) 51TC95
Burden of Proof
'Even supposing that I were myself to think that the amounts were wrong — and, as I have freely conceded, and as [Counsel for the Revenue] has freely conceded, they probably are wrong — what on earth could I or anybody else at this stage, in the total absence of evidence, substitute for them? The answer is that it is a complete and utter impossibility; and that is why, of course, the Taxes Management Act throws upon the taxpayer the onus of showing that the assessments are wrong. It is the taxpayer who knows and the taxpayer who is in a position (or, if not in a position, who certainly should be in a position) to provide the right answer, and chapter and verse for the right answer, and it is idle for any taxpayer to say to the Revenue, 'Hidden somewhere in your vaults are the right answers: go thou and dig them out of the vaults.' That is not a duty on the Revenue. If it were, it would be a very onerous, very costly and very expensive operation, the costs of which would of course fall entirely on the taxpayers as a body. It is the duty of every individual taxpayer to make his own return and, if challenged, to support the return he has made, or, if that return cannot be supported, to come completely dean, and if he gives no evidence whatsoever he cannot be surprised if he is finally lumbered with more than he has in fact received. It is his own fault that he is so lumbered.’
Access Restricted Content
Please log in or subscribe to continue reading.
View our pricing plansAlready have a subscription? Sign In