FS50265616: Difference between revisions
From FOIwiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Alex skene (talk | contribs) CSV import |
Alex skene (talk | contribs) m Text replace - "DNDecision1" to "DNDecision" |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{DNSummaryBox | {{DNSummaryBox | ||
|dn_ref=FS50265616 | |dn_ref=FS50265616 | ||
|dn_date= | |dn_date=4 February 2010 | ||
|dn_pa=Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs | |dn_pa=Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs | ||
|dn_summary=The complainant requested information about how the Amendment to the Memorandum of Understanding on Royal Taxation was initiated by HMRC. HMRC refused to disclose the information by virtue of section 44(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information 2000 Act ( | |dn_summary=The complainant requested information about how the Amendment to the Memorandum of Understanding on Royal Taxation was initiated by HMRC. HMRC refused to disclose the information by virtue of section 44(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information 2000 Act (“the Act”). The public authority argued that section 23(1) of the Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005 (CRCA) gave it an absolute exemption. The Commissioner finds that the statutory bar was correctly applied and agrees with the public authority’s reliance on section 44(1)(a). The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken. | ||
|dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2010/fs_50265616.pdf | |dn_url=http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2010/fs_50265616.pdf | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{DNDecision | {{DNDecision | ||
| | |dnd_section=FOI 44 | ||
| | |dnd_finding=Not upheld | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 22:36, 15 May 2010
Decision Summary
- Case Ref: FS50265616
- Date: 4 February 2010
- Public Authority: Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
- Summary: The complainant requested information about how the Amendment to the Memorandum of Understanding on Royal Taxation was initiated by HMRC. HMRC refused to disclose the information by virtue of section 44(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information 2000 Act (“the Act”). The public authority argued that section 23(1) of the Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005 (CRCA) gave it an absolute exemption. The Commissioner finds that the statutory bar was correctly applied and agrees with the public authority’s reliance on section 44(1)(a). The Commissioner requires no steps to be taken.
- View PDF of Decision Notice: [1]
- Section of Act / Finding: FOI 44 - Complaint Not upheld - Find other matching decisions
