BAILII
British and Irish Legal Information Institute


Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information

[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

United Kingdom VAT & Duties Tribunals Decisions

You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom VAT & Duties Tribunals Decisions >> Metoxal (UK) Ltd v Customs and Excise [2005] UKVAT V19046 (13 April 2005)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKVAT/2005/V19046.html
Cite as: [2005] UKVAT V19046
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
Metoxal (UK) Ltd v Customs and Excise [2005] UKVAT V19046 (13 April 2005)

     
    19046

    MANCHESTER TRIBUNAL CENTRE Reference No: MAN/04/0603

    METOXAL (UK) LIMITED Appellant

    and

    THE COMMISSIONERS OF CUSTOMS AND EXCISE Respondents

    Tribunal Chairman: Colin Bishopp

    Sitting in public in Birmingham on 12 April 2005

    DIRECTION

    under Rule 30(8)

    This appeal against a decision of the Respondents with respect to surcharge assessments dated 14 May 2004 and 13 August 2004 in the sums of £3984.82 and £6511.87 respectively and being a reasonable excuse appeal as defined by rule 2 of the Value Added Tax Tribunals Rules 1986 as amended coming on for hearing this day

    And upon hearing Mr W Kennedy for the Appellant and Mr C Owen of the Solicitor's office of HM Customs and Excise for the Respondents

    And this tribunal having heard this appeal and having announced its decision

    And the Appellant and the Respondents by their said representatives stating pursuant to the rule 30(8) of the said Rules as amended that they do not require the said decision to be recorded in a written document in accordance with rule 30(1) of the said Rules

    This tribunal finds that the Appellant does not have a reasonable excuse for the defaults which resulted in the Respondents making the assessments under appeal but does have a reasonable excuse for the defaults which occurred in respect of its prescribed accounting periods 06/03 and 09/03

    And this tribunal directs that this appeal is allowed in that the defaults for periods 06/03 and 09/03 are to be treated as if they had not occurred and the penalties imposed for subsequent periods are to be recalculated accordingly

    And that there is to be no direction as to costs

    COLIN BISHOPP
    CHAIRMAN
    Release Date: 123 April 2005
    © CROWN COPYRIGHT 2005

About BAILII - FAQ - Copyright Policy - Disclaimers - Privacy Policy amended on 25/11/2010