Tax amendment to declare or not?

[jan39]

I did return amendment for a previous tax year 2013-14 (extension year), now confirmed from HMRC asking me to pay the tax as a result of this amendment, the new tax bill is shown on my HMRC account but not in the sa302 yet.
Problem is I realised I didn't need this amendment as my case is still valid and genuine even without this amendment and I fulfil the earnings with the relevant tax already paid, now the amendment will just increase the income with more tax payment.
Is it possible not to declare this amendment to HO when going to ILR as they may put it in deception?
Will it come in updated SA302?
Your suggestions will be appreciated.

[noajthan]

Suppressing material facts is deception too.

[f317633]

Suppressing material facts is deception too.

2013-14 tax detail is not a material fact. Where is it mentioned that we need to include all tax affairs for last 5 years. This is not even mandatory. If it would have been material, HO would have mentioned it in mandatory list of documents.

[jan39]

Suppressing material facts is deception too.

2013-14 tax detail is not a material fact. Where is it mentioned that we need to include all tax affairs for last 5 years. This is not even mandatory. If it would have been material, HO would have mentioned it in mandatory list of documents.

I agree.
They consider even an amendment as deception where amendment itself is not a deception, amendment is a option given by the Gov (HMRC), it's a legal way to make corrections. It can create doubts but in my opinion it should not be considered straight away as dishonesty or deception unless there is an evidence to prove it.
I think a court judgement will come up with time which will help all applicants and ask HO how making an amendment is a deception unless amendment is illegal to do.

A person working in HMRC said to me they get loads of amendments on daily basis from UK citizens for different reasons, they should be penalised for doing deception by courts by following the stick of HO?

[Wanderer]

It is deception if the amendment is to retrospectively reduce the earnings level used to gain the extension via after-the-event additional expenses in order to reduce tax liability as if the accruals concept never existed.

Not saying this is the case here, but it's happened a lot and that's why UKVI is on it like a car bonnet.

[noajthan]

Suppressing material facts is deception too.

2013-14 tax detail is not a material fact. Where is it mentioned that we need to include all tax affairs for last 5 years. This is not even mandatory. If it would have been material, HO would have mentioned it in mandatory list of documents.

Material facts are not necessarily listed in a tick box list of documents and requirements.

And this is little or nothing to do with HMRC and what millions of law-abiding, tax-paying citizens do or don't do.

Its about compliance with visa terms and complying with Immigration Regulations; that is a completely different kettle of fish.
And, where discretion applies, its about persuading a caseworker on the basis of a balance of probabilities.

[aliq09]

Hi ,

You have to be super careful while you are dealing with any gov department and above all honest. Anyways to my best knowledge and in my opinion , CW will learn that you have send some amendments to your tax records. It's all up to you now to make your case . Additionally , you will put your self at much risk while amending 2nd time . Please also see the comments made by another board members. Here is what you need to do : 1) stick to what's been done 2) prepare your case

Wish you best of luck mate!

[jan39]

I will not hide the amendment, hiding it is of course deception and will not be defended in any court but doing amendment can be defended any where as it's a legal way to do corrections by HMRC, that's what I tried to explain in previous post.

HO is an Govt department like other departments, they work on documented proofs. CW has got the authority to judge the balance of probabilities and make a decision but in my opinion he is not a judge, and no official or even a judge can make a judgement on personal way of judging probabilities, all of them working with docs and evidence, and they have to follow the rules and evidence, where amendment is a rule provided by HMRC.
As I already said considering an amendment straight away as deception in not fair, unless it's proved with evidence. That's why I gave an example of the citizens doing amendments, as they should not be considered as deception by HMRC, similarly HO is a Gov department like HMRC, regardless of they working with visas/immigration or whatever.