United Kingdom VAT & Duties Tribunals Decisions

---

You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom VAT & Duties Tribunals Decisions >> Flagship Media Group Ltd v Revenue and Customs [2005] UKVAT V19402 (29 December 2005)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKVAT/2005/V19402.html
Cite as: [2005] UKVAT V19402

---

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

---

Flagship Media Group Ltd v Revenue and Customs [2005] UKVAT V19402 (29 December 2005)

19402

Default Surcharge – Appeal against assessment failure to attend – VAT Tribunal Rules 1986 - Decision under Rule.26 - Direction to Appellant to serve particulars of grounds of appeal – Appeal dismissed.

LONDON TRIBUNAL CENTRE

FLAGSHIP MEDIA GROUP LIMITED Appellant

and –

THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HER MAJESTY'S REVENUE & CUSTOMS Respondents

Tribunal: MR I HUDDLESTON (Chairman)

Sitting in public in Belfast on 19 October 2005

The Appellant not appearing

Bernard Haley of the Solicitor's Office of HMRC for the Respondents

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2005


 


DECISION
1. This is an appeal against six Default surcharge assessments raised for each of the periods 08/02 until 11/03. The aggregate amount of the assessments is £35,124.75.
2. The Appellant's notice of appeal is dated 28^th June 2004 and was lodged on behalf of the Appellant by its accountants Ernest & Young. It gives the grounds of appeal as follows:-

"My client is of the view that Customs and Excise have not considered all relevant information in respect of the reasons for default."

3. The appeal was listed for hearing on 10^th August 2004. At the request of the Appellant's accountants, the matter was stood over to a later date to allow for local negotiation to take place.
4. The appeal was listed again for 18^th March 2005 and again for 19^th October 2005.
5. On the morning of the hearing (19^th October 2005) the Clerk Tribunal had telephoned the Appellant and left a message asking him to contact the Tribunal Centre advising whether or not he proposed to make an appearance. When the case was called on there was no representation for the Appellant. I therefore decided to go ahead with the appeal in the absence of any representation pursuant to Rule 26 of the Value Added Tax Tribunals Rules. These provide that, when a hearing is conducted in a party's absence, the Tribunal may proceed. It is, however, provided by Rule 26 (3) that the Tribunal has power to set aside any decision given in the absence of a party on such terms as it thinks fit. The absent party must make an application in writing within 14 days of the release of the decision and, when the application comes on for hearing, he must attend the hearing in the evidence, it appears that the Appellant and its instructed advisors have neither taken forward any negotiation with the Respondent nor have they adduced any further evidence in support of or by way of prosecution of the Appeal despite having been given the opportunity do so. In those circumstances I accept the Default Surcharge assessments as raised as being good and therefore dismiss the Appeal.

I make no direction as to costs.

I HUDDLESTON CHAIRMAN RELEASED: 30 December 2005

LON/2004/971