## Facts

- Fulford Dobson and others challenged the Inland Revenue’s withdrawal of an extra-statutory concession related to capital gains tax computations on share disposals.
- The concession previously allowed taxpayers to use the market value of shares at a specified date, which sometimes reduced their tax liability.
- Upon withdrawal of the concession, the applicants faced higher tax liabilities, prompting them to seek judicial review.
- The Inland Revenue had notified taxpayers of the withdrawal and the change in calculation methods.

## Issues

1. Whether the Inland Revenue’s withdrawal of the extra-statutory concession regarding capital gains tax calculations was lawful.
2. Whether extra-statutory concessions can create legally enforceable legitimate expectations for taxpayers.
3. Whether the Inland Revenue’s decision to withdraw the concession met requirements of rationality and procedural fairness.

## Decision

- The court held that the Inland Revenue has limited discretionary powers and cannot override or materially alter statutory tax law via extra-statutory concessions.
- Withdrawal of the concession was found to be rational and not so unreasonable as to fail the Wednesbury unreasonableness test.
- The court determined that the applicants’ alleged legitimate expectation did not arise, given the concession was expressly non-binding and subject to withdrawal.
- The Inland Revenue acted fairly by providing notification of the withdrawal to affected taxpayers.

## Legal Principles

- Extra-statutory concessions do not have the power to override or alter statutory provisions and are not legally enforceable.
- Tax authorities must remain within statutory boundaries in granting and withdrawing concessions.
- The Wednesbury unreasonableness standard is used to assess administrative decisions: a decision is unlawful only if no reasonable authority could have reached it.
- Legitimate expectations may arise from clear, unambiguous assurances, but not where a concession is explicitly non-binding and withdrawable.
- Procedural fairness is satisfied by adequate notice and transparency in administrative action.

## Conclusion

The High Court confirmed that extra-statutory concessions granted by the Inland Revenue are non-binding and can be withdrawn, provided statutory tax law is not contravened and administrative fairness is observed, thus reaffirming the limits of administrative discretion in tax matters.

R v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte Fulford Dobson [1987] STC 344