First-tier Tribunal (Tax)

[2010] UKFTT 370 (TC)

TC00652

Appeal number: TC/2010/01452

Tax referred for recovery- previous determinations – whether late appeal allowed - no

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL

TAX

                                        MRS CAROL A SPENCER                       Appellant

                                                                      - and -

                                 THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HER MAJESTY’S

                                                   REVENUE AND CUSTOMS               Respondents

TRIBUNAL: Michael S Connell (Judge)                                                                                                    Beverley Tanner (Member)                         

Sitting in public in Manchester on 9^th July 2010

For the Appellant – the Appellant in person

Mr B Morgan, Presenting Officer of HM Revenue and Customs, for the Respondents

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2010

DECISION

1.       This is an appeal by Carol Spencer who disputed an outstanding debt of £9,415.51 which had been referred for recovery.

2.       The amount due to HMRC consisted of income tax liabilities in respect of the years 1998-99 - 2001-02 inclusive, late return filing penalties for the years 1998-99, 2004-05, 2005-06, late payment surcharges for the years 1998-99, 1999-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02 and non-compliance penalties.

3.       On 6 March 2007 the General Commissioners of Income Tax determined the amount of tax payable by Mrs Spencer for the years 1998-99 – 2001-02 inclusive which totalled £5,537. Mrs Spencer did not appeal the determination which in any event could have only been on a point of law.

4.       In addition to the determined tax liability late filing penalties amounted to £300, late payment surcharges amounted to £531 and non-compliance penalties amounted to £1,860. In addition completed tax returns for 2004-05 and 2005-06  showed that there were further liabilities of £3,785.89 together with accrued interest. After deduction of payments made on account the total sum due for recovery was £9,415.51.

5.       Mrs Spencer said that she had paid the sum of £5,714.57 and disputed that any further tax was outstanding. Mrs Spencer did not provide any breakdown of the figure of £5,714.57 which she said had been paid and provided no reasoning or other details as to why the full sum of £9,415.51 was not due and payable other than to maintain that she thought most of the tax had been paid and that some of the penalties and surcharges should not have been levied.

6.       At the hearing, the Tribunal referred Mrs Spencer to HMRC’s letter of 26 November 2009 which concisely set out the amounts due, which totalled £9,415.51. Mrs Spencer accepted that she understood how the figure was calculated. She also accepted that the sum of £5,537 which formed part of the total sum due of £9,415.51 related to final determinations made by the General Commissioners of Income Tax on 6 March 2007 and that these had been confirmed on 12 July 2007 without appeal.  Mrs Spencer agreed that the balance related to penalties, surcharges and interest primarily on those determinations and also late return filing penalties for the years 1998-99, 2004-05 and 2005-06 amounted to £300 which were not in dispute. Other than disputing that the full sum of £9,415.51 was due and payable Mrs Spencer was not able to proffer any reasoning as to why that should be and was also unable to provide any evidence that part of the sum might have already been paid.

7.       The appeal by Mrs Spencer in respect of the decision determination of the General Commissioners of Income Tax on 6 March 2007 and confirmed on 12 July 2007 was considerably out of time. HMRC objected to the late appeal and the purpose of the Tribunal hearing was to determine whether there was an appealable matter. The hearing was a preliminary hearing to decide whether the appeal should be accepted late, and if so to clarify the subject matter of the appeal so that there could be a categorisation of the case which would determine the future conduct of the proceedings.

8.       It was clear to the Tribunal that the matters which the Appellant wished to dispute had already been determined by the General Commissioners of Income Tax and the appeal was out of time. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.

9.       This document contains full findings of fact and reasons for the decision. Any party dissatisfied with this decision has a right to apply for permission to appeal against it pursuant to Rule 39 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009.   The application must be received by this Tribunal not later than 56 days after this decision is sent to that party.  The parties are referred to “Guidance to accompany a Decision from the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)” which accompanies and forms part of this decision notice.

MICHAEL S CONNELL

TRIBUNAL JUDGE

RELEASE DATE: 10 August 2010