United Kingdom VAT & Duties Tribunals Decisions

---

You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom VAT & Duties Tribunals Decisions >> Boyd & Anor (t/a Boyd Motors) v Revenue & Customs [2007] UKVAT V20034 (06 March 2007)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKVAT/2007/V20034.html
Cite as: [2007] UKVAT V20034

---

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

---

Geoffrey & Gillian Boyd (t/a Boyd Motors v Revenue & Customs [2007] UKVAT V20034 (06 March 2007)

20034

EC Sales List – failure to submit - Appeal against penalty – Appeal dismissed

LONDON TRIBUNAL CENTRE

GEOFFREY & GILLIAN BOYD Appellant

T/A BOYD MOTORS

and –

THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HER MAJESTY'S REVENUE & CUSTOMS Respondents

Tribunal: IAN W HUDDLESTON (Chairman)

MISS PATRICIA GORDON

Sitting in public in Belfast on 27 October 2006

Mr Jonathan Caldwell, Accountant for the Appellant

Mr F Phillips, BL, instructed by the Solicitors Office of HM Revenue & Customs, for the Respondents

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2007


 


DECISION

Appeal

1. This is an Appeal against penalty liability notices served on the Appellants on the 26^th September 2005 for:

(a) the late filing of an EC sales list for the quarter 04/4 (due 11/02/05), for which a penalty of £500 was applied (calculated at £5 per day for the maximum period of 100 days); and

(b) the late filing of an EC sales list for the quarter 05/1 (due 12/05/05) (calculated at the rate of £10 per day for the maximum period of 100 days).

Decision

2. The grounds on which the Appellants rely for a claim of "reasonable excuse" for the late filing of the EC Sales List in question were originally set out in a letter sent by its accountants, Messrs. J.E.M. Caldwell & Co., which were reiterated by Mr. Caldwell on behalf of the Appellants before the Tribunal. Mr. Caldwell indicated that:

(a) the first return had been submitted on or about 11^th July 2004, but it was clear that it had not been received by HM Revenue & Customs, and Mr. Caldwell suggested that it had got lost in the post. A copy was enclosed under cover of his letter of the 31^st October 2005;

(b) as regards the second return, there did appear to be some confusion. Mr. Caldwell in his letter (as tabled before the Tribunal) referred to the late filing of a EC sales list for the quarter to 31^st December 2004. In point of fact the penalty liability notice related to the late filing of the EC sales list for the quarter 05/1, which was due on the 12^th April 2005. Mr. Caldwell could not recall any justification for the late filing of this particular return.

3. Section 66 VATA 1994 sets out quite clearly the method of calculating a penalty for late filing of an EC sales list. In the circumstances of this case it was clear that the two EC sales lists to which the penalty notices before the Tribunal referred had been filed late. Mr. Caldwell, on behalf of the Appellants, had suggested that the first had been lost in the post, but could give no excuse as to the late filing of the second.
4. Evidence was given by Customs of an earlier default and the serving by them of a warning notice on 10^th August 2004.
5. Whilst the Tribunal is empowered, pursuant to Section 66(7) VATA 1994, to discharge a penalty if the Tribunal is satisfied that there is a "reasonable excuse", the Tribunal did not, on the facts of this case, consider that grounds sufficient to justify a "reasonable excuse" had been made. In those circumstances, the Appeal would be dismissed.
6. No order as to costs.
IAN HUDDLESTON CHAIRMAN RELEASED: 6 March 2007

LON/2006/640