First-tier Tribunal (Tax)

[2014] UKFTT 615 (TC)

TC03740

Appeal number: TC/2014/01774

Income tax – individual tax return – penalty for late filing – whether reasonable excuse

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL

TAX CHAMBER

The Tribunal determined the appeal on 13.06.2014 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 01.04.2014 v(with enclosures), HMRC’s Statement of Case submitted on 01.05.2014 (with enclosures) and the Appellant’s Reply dated 28.05.2014 (with enclosure).

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2014

DECISION

1.             The Tribunal decided that the Individual Tax Return Late Filing Penalty dated 18.02 2014 was properly issued by the Respondents.

2.             The appeal is dismissed.

3.             The Tribunal found that the filing date for the appellant’s non-electronic Return for the year 2012-2013 was 31.10.2014. The appellant attempted to file a paper Return on 11.07.2013 but it was returned to her by the Respondents because of a lack of clarity. She further attempted to file a paper Return on 29.08.2013 but it was again returned to her by the Respondents for review of her UK property.

4.             The Tribunal is made aware that the Appellant made a further attempt at filing her Return on 24.03.2014 but it was again returned to her because the property pages were not completed and some information was incorrect. The Tribunal is also informed that at the date of preparation of the Respondent’s Statement of Case (01.05.2014) a complete and valid Return had still not been received by the Respondents.

5.             The Tribunal further found that there was no reasonable excuse for the failure to file the Return on time. In particular the rejection by the Respondents of two invalid Returns did not absolve the Appellant from her responsibility to file a valid return; there is no medical evidence of the Appellant’s illness to confirm that it was of a nature or degree that would have prevented her from attending to her personal and business affairs immediately before the due date; it is noted that her illness did not prevent her from completing and submitting two Returns (albeit invalid) in July and August 2013; she had ample time, after the two rejections, to attend to the completion of  a valid Return; there is no record of her contacting the Respondents for any help or advice regarding personal difficulties in completing the Return.

6.             The appellant pleads hardship in her Notice of Appeal; that is not a ground for mitigating the penalty.

7.             The test applied by the Tribunal in considering the matter of reasonable excuse is whether the exercise of reasonable foresight and of due diligence and a proper regard for the fact that the Return would become due on a particular date would not have avoided the default. The facts and chronology of events, set out in the Notice of Appeal and the Respondent’s Statement of Case, disclose that such foresight and diligence by the Appellant would have avoided the default.

8.             In so far as the Appellant may suggest that the imposition of the penalty is disproportionate, unjust or unfair, those arguments have already been disposed of by the Upper Tribunal in HMRC v Hok [2012] UKUT 363 (TCC) and HMRC v Total Technology (Engineering) Ltd [2012] UKUT 418 (TCC). In the former it was made clear that the First-tier Tribunal has no jurisdiction to determine the fairness of a penalty imposed by statute. It is plain from a perusal of the latter that a penalty of the magnitude of that imposed in this case could not be described as disproportionate even if there were jurisdiction to deal with that argument.

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.

WDF COVERDALE

TRIBUNAL JUDGE

RELEASE DATE: 18 June 2014