United Kingdom VAT & Duties Tribunals Decisions

---

You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom VAT & Duties Tribunals Decisions >> Sutherland Commercial Cleaning Services Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2008] UKVAT V20651 (15 April 2008)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKVAT/2008/V20651.html
Cite as: [2008] UKVAT V20651

---

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

---

Sutherland Commercial Cleaning Services Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2008] UKVAT V20651 (15 April 2008)

20651

Default Surcharge: Late payment; unsigned cheque; non matching figures and words for Vat payable; late payment history: Appeal refused.

EDINBURGH TRIBUNAL CENTRE

SUTHERLAND COMMERCIAL CLEANING SERVICES LTD

Appellant(s)

- and -

THE COMMISSIONERS FOR

HER MAJESTY'S REVENUE & CUSTOMS Respondents

Tribunal: (Chairman): Mrs G Pritchard, BL., MBA., WS

Sitting in Edinburgh on Tuesday 1 April 2008.

for the Appellant(s) Mr Mark Smith

for the Respondents Mr Russell Harrison

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2008.
 


DECISION

This is an appeal against a Default Surcharge applied in respect of the quarter 08/07 in the sum of £640.99.

Mr Mark Smith appeared for the Appellant and was credible. Mr Russell Harrison appeared for Customs.

Facts Found

1. The Appellant had a history of Default Surcharge.
2. A Surcharge Liability Notice was first issued for the quarter 08/06 though the previous quarter's return and payment were also late.
3. For the 2 subsequent late quarters 11/06 and 05/07, no penalty was imposed as the sum calculated was below the minimum charge.
4. The percentage applicable to this 08/07 quarter was therefore 10%.
5. The return and payment were one day late. This would have been overlooked by Customs, but the cheque was unsigned.
6. When the cheque was returned it was noted the written long hand sum did not accord with the sum in figures, and the cheque was returned again and finally presented very late indeed.
7. The penalty notice was issued and appealed.
8. Mr Smith had made two mistakes only. He believed his return and payment should have been timeous as posted well in time for arriving on 30.09.07.
9. He believed that his mistakes should be accepted.

Decision

The appeal is refused. The system of VAT payment is demanding and depends on accuracy and attention to dates. The history does not give an impression of meeting the demands. Although I had some sympathy with Mr Smith I consider the errors were more significant than he wished me to think.

No expenses are found due to or by either party.

MRS G PRITCHARD, BL., MBA., WS CHAIRMAN
RELEASE: 15 APRIL 2008

EDN/07/145