Capuano
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judgment Date | 06 March 2018 |
| Neutral Citation | [2018] UKFTT 114 (TC) |
| Date | 06 March 2018 |
| Court | First Tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) |
[2018] UKFTT 0114 (TC)
Judge Heidi Poon, Anthony Hennessey
No attendance or representation appeared for the appellant
Mr Greg Morran, Officer of HM Revenue and Customs, appeared for the respondents
Income tax – Penalties for the late filing of 2011–12 return – FA 2009, Sch. 55 – Taxpayer brought into self-assessment due to PAYE underpayment – Whether the taxpayer had a reasonable excuse – Appeal allowed.
[1] The appellant, Mr Capuano, appeals against the penalties that HMRC have imposed under Schedule 55 of the Finance Act 2009 (“Schedule 55”) for a failure to submit the 2011–12 self-assessment return (“SA return”) on time.
[2] The penalties that have been charged can be summarised as follows:
- a £100 late filing penalty under paragraph 3 of Schedule 55 imposed on 14 October 2014.
- Daily penalties totalling £900 under paragraph 4 of Schedule 55 imposed on 14 April 2015.
- a £300 six-month penalty under paragraph 5 of Schedule 55 imposed on 14 April 2015.
- a £300 twelve-month penalty under paragraph 5 of Schedule 55 imposed on 13 October 2015.
[3] The Tribunal was satisfied that a notice of the hearing was sent to the appellant's correspondence address as noted on the Notice of Appeal. The appellant was also given notice that the Tribunal has the discretion to proceed with the hearing in his absence. Having considered the grounds of appeal as stated in the Notice, the Tribunal considers that the case the appellant seeks to make is sufficiently clear. We also have regard to the overriding objective of the Tribunal's procedure rules, which is to deal with matters fairly and justly, which includes avoiding delay. For these reasons, we heard the appeal in the appellant's absence.
[4] The appellant has made an application to make a late appeal on his Notice of Appeal. HMRC do not oppose the application. The consideration of reasonable excuse for the appeal being made out of time is essentially similar to that for the delay in filing his return. For this reason, we have decided to grant permission for the late appeal and to consider the substantive appeal.
[5] Section 8 of the Taxes Management Act 1970 (“TMA”) places a statutory obligation on a taxpayer to make and deliver a return to HMRC by the stipulated due date if a notice has been served on the taxpayer. Section 8(1D) provides for the due dates of filing, whereby a paper return is due by 31 October, and an electronic return is due by 31 January in the following tax year.
[6] Paragraph 3 of Schedule 55 provides for a penalty of £100 if a return is not received by the filing date.
[7] Paragraph 4 provides that if after a period of three months beginning with the penalty date, the return remains outstanding, then daily penalties of £10 per day up to a period of 90 days are payable.
[8] Paragraphs 5 and 6 provide for a fixed penalty of £300 if the return remains outstanding at six and twelve months after the filing due date.
[9] Paragraph 23 of Schedule 55 FA 2009 provides that a penalty does not arise in relation to a failure to make a return if the person satisfies HMRC (or on an appeal, the Tribunal) that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Griffiths
...or what was said. However, HMRC's “customer service” at the time, to say the least, left a lot to be desired. The Tribunal in Capuano [2018] TC 06371 commented on the criticisms by the National Audit Commission and the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee in that period. The fact that......