Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
We might be a little at cross purposes. Replying in the vein you state is fine from a point of view of the general correspondence.
I was referring specifically to the point at which a closure notice is received (as mentioned by akan). Given the closure notices are likely to come out in quite a deluge do you really think MTP will be able to formally instigate the appeal process in this time? I'm not saying they can't but logistically it could be very difficult. If they don't get the appeal in in 30 days, game over.
Certainly if I were in this position I'd be asking somebody "how do I appeal this to ensure that I *can* protect my interests".
Just read the letter - as i said yesterday, AKAN shoudl reread as he clearing has read it - now you are building on his misreading. Its two sentances - read them properly, digest and follwo intructions. If you are not a montp preson - you wont have the letter - you cant read it - and guess what - it doesnt matter as you won't be needing to do anything in it ....... and we are NOT gogin to state on here what it sayd - so if thats the angle ....sorry but we ar not falling for it
Can I write "Professional advice is being taken, see you in court Mr Brannigan"?
Incidentally, Branningan is merely the name of the first Hector to initiate an enquiry in this particualr issue; they use one name for simplicity (and it will be Mr Brannigan's name on the court papers but I bet you won't see him there. You're actually dealing with some random Hector in your local tax office.
Incidentally, Branningan is merely the name of the first Hector to initiate an enquiry in this particualr issue; they use one name for simplicity (and it will be Mr Brannigan's name on the court papers but I bet you won't see him there. You're actually dealing with some random Hector in your local tax office.
Wrong again (on more than one count incidentially) - please would you just leave this thread alone.
Bazza gets caught
Socrates - "The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing."
Yes you are - are you under enquiry - No - so how the **** would you know?
No you're right, I have no idea how HMRC prursue their court cases, never having had any opportunity to study them - well, apart from the 50 or so samples on the PCG website and the associated expert commentaries of course...
No you're right, I have no idea how HMRC prursue their court cases, never having had any opportunity to study them - well, apart from the 50 or so samples on the PCG website and the associated expert commentaries of course...
No Mal - you made a comment about this particular enquiry that was incorrect but you are so self absorbed that you can't/won't accept that you are wrong!!
Bazza gets caught
Socrates - "The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing."
Just read the letter - as i said yesterday, AKAN shoudl reread as he clearing has read it - now you are building on his misreading. Its two sentances - read them properly, digest and follwo intructions. If you are not a montp preson - you wont have the letter - you cant read it - and guess what - it doesnt matter as you won't be needing to do anything in it ....... and we are NOT gogin to state on here what it sayd - so if thats the angle ....sorry but we ar not falling for it
Nope, don't have the letter and won't get it either. I wasn't trying to debate it's contents either. Merely trying to point out a potentially significant misunderstanding in what might be required when a closure notice is received (if they ever are of course).
Comment