United Kingdom VAT & Duties Tribunals Decisions

---

You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom VAT & Duties Tribunals Decisions >> Arch Building & Construction Ltd v Revenue and Customs [2006] UKVAT V19457 (17 February 2006)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKVAT/2006/V19457.html
Cite as: [2006] UKVAT V19457

---

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

---

Arch Building & Construction Ltd v Revenue and Customs [2006] UKVAT V19457 (17 February 2006)

19457

SECURITY – appellant did not appear – appeal dismissed

LONDON TRIBUNAL CENTRE

ARCH BUILDING & CONSTRUCTION LIMITED Appellant

- and -

THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HER MAJESTY'S

REVENUE AND CUSTOMS Respondents

Tribunal: DR JOHN F AVERY JONES CBE (Chairman)

SUNIL K DAS

Sitting in public in London on 16 February 2006

The Appellant was not represented

Pauline Crinnion, Senior Officer of HM Revenue and Customs, for the Respondents

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2006


 


DECISION

1. This is an appeal against a Notice of Requirement dated 7 June 2005 for Arch building & Construction Limited to give security of £9,200 (or £6,100 if monthly returns are rendered). Customs were represented by Mrs P Crinnion.
2. The Appellant did not appear and the burden of proof is on the Appellant to show that the requirement is unreasonable.
3. We heard the appeal in the Appellant's absence under Rule 26(2) of the VAT Tribunals Rules 1986. In brief, the Appellant has been in the default surcharge regime since 11/03. Mr R C Clarke, the company secretary has been involved in five companies that have failed resulting in debts to Customs. A time to pay agreement was made in February 2005 that £13,673.22 would be paid by 11 February 2005 (which it was) and that further payments would be made between March and May 2005. No further payments were made. The current debt to Customs is about £22,000. The level of security was calculated from the tax declared in the periods 05/04 to 02/05 ignoring the outstanding debt. The amount of he security is the usual six months tax (four months for monthly returns).
4. There is nothing unreasonable about the demand and we dismiss the appeal.

JOHN F. AVERY JONES

CHAIRMAN

RELEASE DATE: 17 February 2006

LON/05/0653