The case of R (Khan) v SSHD (Dishonesty, Tax Return, Paragraph 322(5))  UKUT 384 (IAC) (3 May 2018) is worth to have a look at. It set out principles that Secretary of State failed to consider when deciding on applications made by Tier 1 migrants.
In Royal Brunei Airlines v Tan  UKPC 4 Lord Nicholls said that “carelessness is not dishonesty” and thus the refusal was arguably irrational and unlawful. The Supreme Court approved of this statement in Ivey v Genting Casino  UKSC 67.
The Tribunal noted that in response to the applicant’s reliance on the decision in Sagar Arun Samant  UKAITUR JR65462016 (discussed here), the Home Office produced a list of cases where applicants had “jumped on the band wagon” but the Tribunal had rejected any evidence blaming the accountants. Very clear examples of this point were found in Kamal  UKAITUR JR114172016, Parveen and Saleem  UKAITUR JR94402016 and other cases.