British
and Irish Legal Information Institute
Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[
Home]
[
Databases]
[
World Law]
[
Multidatabase Search]
[
Help]
[
Feedback]
First-tier Tribunal (Tax)
You are here:
BAILII >>
Databases >>
First-tier Tribunal (Tax) >>
Kirmell Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2012] UKFTT 442 (TC) (05 July 2012)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/TC/2012/TC02123.html
Cite as:
[2012] UKFTT 442 (TC)
[
New search]
[
Printable PDF version]
[
Help]
Kirmell Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2012] UKFTT 442 (TC) (05 July 2012)
INCOME TAX/CORPORATION TAX
Penalty
[2012] UKFTT 442 (TC)
TC02123
Appeal number:
TC/2011/05446
PAYE – late payment –
penalty – whether there was a reasonable excuse – appeal dismissed
FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL
TAX CHAMBER
|
KIRMELL LIMITED
|
Appellant
|
|
|
|
|
- and -
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE COMMISSIONERS
FOR HER MAJESTY’S
|
Respondents
|
|
REVENUE &
CUSTOMS
|
|
TRIBUNAL:
|
JUDGE J. BLEWITT
|
|
T. BAYLISS
|
Sitting in public at Birmingham on 11 June 2012
The Appellant did not attend
and was not represented
Ms Taylor, instructed by the
General Counsel and Solicitor to HM Revenue and Customs, for the Respondents
© CROWN COPYRIGHT
2012
DECISION
1.
This is an appeal against a penalty in the sum of £6,991.62, as amended
by HMRC and notified to the Tribunal and Appellant following the Tribunal case
of Agor (TC/2011/04910) by letter dated 11 April 2012.
2.
The penalty was imposed in respect of the late payment of PAYE from 5
May 2010 to 5 March 2011 inclusive and was issued to the Appellant on 9 June
2011.
3.
The Appellant did not attend the hearing and was not represented. The
Tribunal had notified the Appellant of the date of the hearing to the Appellant
by letter dated 23 April 2012. Upon contacting the Appellant, the Clerk to the
Tribunal was informed that the person who had intended to attend was ill. No application
to adjourn the appeal was made by the Appellant. The Tribunal was satisfied
that there had been sufficient notification of the hearing and that it was in
the interests of justice to proceed in the absence of the Appellant under Rule
33 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal)(Tax Chamber) Rules 2009.
4.
In the Notice of Appeal dated 12 July 2011 the grounds of appeal relied
upon were:
“Not happy with the decision as explanation is not
satisfactory. We believe that we have reasonable excuse why payments were made
late. We did not had the money to pay. Please see attached copy of the letter.”
5.
Annexed to the Notice of Appeal was a letter dated 20 June 2011 from the
Appellant to HMRC’s Debt Management Unit, which explained that for the last few
years the Appellant Company had been affected by the recession with reduced
orders, non-paying customers and an increasing number of bad debts which had
caused the late PAYE payments.
6.
The Appellant further stated that all taxes had been paid and that the
Company had remained in business despite many other similar companies closing.
The Appellant requested that the penalty be removed as the Company cannot
afford to pay it.
7.
HMRC records showed that the Appellant had made late payments of PAYE
regularly since 2002. Furthermore, the Appellant had not followed the advice
set out in the penalty warning letter issued by HMRC on 28 May 2010 after its
first default, which warned that penalties could be incurred and that
assistance with payment could be obtained from HMRC’s Business Payment Support
Service.
8.
HMRC issued notices under Regulation 78 Income Tax (PAYE) Regulations
2003 which required payment of the outstanding liabilities on the following
dates:
Month
|
|
1
|
27/5/10
|
2
|
28/6/10
|
3
|
5/8/10
|
4
|
31/8/10
|
5
|
30/9/10
|
7
|
30/11/10
|
8
|
7/1/11
|
9
|
26/1/11
|
11
|
25/3/11
|
9.
Logs produced by HMRC showed that 10 attempts were made to contact the
Appellant by telephone in the 2010/2011 period, yet the Appellant did not
return HMRC’s calls in response to the messages left.
10.
In addition to the previous late payments, HMRC also submitted that the
Appellant had continued to pay late in each of the 4 months in the 2011/2012
period prior to submission of HMRC’s Statement of Case.
11.
The Appellant’s grounds of appeal relied upon the effect of the
recession, yet the unchallenged evidence of HMRC showed that the Company’s poor
compliance began as far back as 19 February 2002, prior to the recession, and
has continued ever since.
12.
In the absence of any evidence from the Appellant to support its assertions
that non-paying customers and increasing bad debts were the cause of the late
payments, or any explanation as to why the Appellant did not avail itself of
HMRC’s facilities to assist with hardship, such as Time To Pay arrangements or
Business Payment Support, we found that the Appellant did not have a reasonable
excuse.
13.
The appeal is dismissed.
14.
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.
J. BLEWITT
TRIBUNAL JUDGE
RELEASE DATE: 5 July 2012