Tomlinson v Revenue & Customs
The appellant was lawfully required to deliver a section 8 return; the R40 form and spreadsheets did not satisfy the statutory requirements; the notice was validly issued without naming the individual officer; the Revenue's discretion was properly exercised; and no reasonable excuse for non-delivery was established. The penalty stands.
- Parties
- Appellant: David Tomlinson; Respondents: Commissioners for HM Revenue & Customs
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 01 November 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal by Case Stated / Judgment After Full Hearing
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Self Assessment Returns, Penalties for Late Filing, Validity of Tax Notices, Reasonable Excuse for Non Compliance
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
David Tomlinson
Appellant
Commissioners for HM Revenue & Customs
Respondents
Procedural Posture
Appeal by Case Stated / Judgment After Full Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a form R40 is a valid substitute for a section 8 tax return under the Taxes Management Act 1970
- 2 Whether the notice under section 8 must name the individual officer issuing it
- 3 Whether the Revenue's discretion to require a section 8 return was exercised reasonably and proportionately
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant was lawfully required to deliver a section 8 return; the R40 form and spreadsheets did not satisfy the statutory requirements; the notice was validly issued without naming the individual officer; the Revenue's discretion was properly exercised; and no reasonable excuse for non-delivery was established. The penalty stands.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Penalty of £100 confirmed
- Appellant to pay respondents' costs summarily assessed at £3,520
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment