First-tier Tribunal (Tax)

[2014] UKFTT 186 (TC)

TC03326

Appeal number: TC/2013/06383

PAYE – SELF-ASSESSMENT – LATE FILING OF RETURN –  INITIALLY TOLD BY HMRC ADVISOR THAT NO RETURN REQUIRED – RETURN ISSUED IN MARCH AND EXTENDED TIME TO SUBMIT IT ALLOWED  - APPELLANT STILL REQUIRING CLARIFICATION -  WHETHER REASONABLE EXCUSE - NO – APPEAL DISMISSED

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL

TAX CHAMBER

The Tribunal determined the appeal on 3 February 2014 without a hearing under the provisions of Rule 26 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal)(Tax Chamber) Rules 2009 (default paper cases) having first read the Notice of Appeal dated 4 September  2013 (with enclosures), and HMRC’s Statement of Case submitted on 26 November 2013 (with enclosures).

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2014

DECISION

1 The appellant appeals against the decision of HMRC to impose a  penalty of £100  under Paragraph 3 of Schedule 55 to the Finance Act 2009 for the late filing of her individual tax return  for the year ending 5 April 2012.  A non- electronic return was received by HMRC on 5 June 2013. The notice of appeal was received late but allowed on application to the Tribunal.

2. In the Notice of Appeal the appellant  says that she was told by an advisor at HMRC in response to a query made in January 2013 that she did not need to complete a return for the year 2011-12 for rental income that she had received and when she was finally asked to complete a return it the January deadline had already passed. She had written to HMRC on 25 January 2013 but had not received a reply although she did receive the tax return they sent her.

3. HMRC accept that the appellant contacted them in January 2013 about the commencement of an income source in February 2012. They say that the deadline for  advising HMRC of that new income source, which required the completion of a self-assessment return, was 31 October 2012. The appellant failed in that obligation as she did not advise HMRC until January 2013.The advisor who spoke to the appellant told her to confirm details of her new income in writing but a decision was then made to send her a tax return for 2011-12.   This was issued on 24 January with a revised filing date of three months and seven days after the issue date. HMRC say that the appellant  contacted them by phone on 15 March 2013 and was told that a return had been sent out to her and offering a duplicate in the event of her not having received it. The appellant then wrote to HMRC again on 9 April querying the conflicting information she had received and HMRC replied by letter on 29 April 2013 reiterating that a return was required and enclosing a duplicate form. HMRC  conclude that the appellant has not established that on a balance of probabilities there is a reasonable excuse for her failure to file her return on time.  

4.  If a person is to rely on reasonable excuse, this must have existed for the whole of the period of default. A reasonable excuse is normally an unexpected or unusual event, either unforeseeable or beyond the person’s control, which prevents him from complying with an obligation when he otherwise would have done. The matter has to be considered in the light of the actions of a reasonable prudent tax payer exercising foresight and due diligence and having proper regard for his responsibilities under the Taxes Act.  

5. I have given careful consideration to all the evidence before me in this case. I accept that the appellant may have been told initially on the phone that a tax return would not be  necessary bur she was then sent a return for completion and it was subsequently confirmed to her twice that a return was required. She refers in her letter of 9 April to  HMRC’s letter of 29^th March, telling her a return was required and had been issued to her and to contact them if she had not received it. That letter is clear that a return was required. It seems to me that the appellant received an answer to her query and that it was made clear to her in March 2013 that a return had to be filed but she did not do this until 5 June. There is no explanation for her failure to deal with the return which she had been clearly told was required. I find that she  has  not established that she has a reasonable excuse for her failure to file her return on time.  

7.  I dismiss the appeal.

8.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.

N A BAIRD

TRIBUNAL JUDGE

RELEASE DATE:  13 February 2014