Freedom Recycling Ltd v The Commissioners for HMRC

Freedom Recycling Ltd v The Commissioners for HMRC

The Tribunal found that the assessment and penalty were issued within the statutory time limits, as the assessing officer did not have sufficient evidence until March 2014. The Appellant was found to be holding the goods within the meaning of the regulations, based on consistent third-party evidence identifying its premises as the collection point. The assessment was made to best judgment, and the penalty was properly applied for non-deliberate, prompted behaviour. Knowledge or intent was not required for liability.

Parties
Appellant: Freedom Recycling Ltd; Respondents: The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Excise Duty Assessment, Excise Wrongdoing Penalty, Duty Suspension Arrangements, Time Limits for Assessment, Liability for Excise Duty, Burden of Proof, Best Judgment Assessment
Tax Law Excise Duty Excise Duty Assessment Excise Wrongdoing Penalty Duty Suspension Arrangements Time Limits for Assessment Liability for Excise Duty Burden of Proof +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Freedom Recycling Ltd

Appellant

The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Tax Appeal / First Tier Tribunal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the excise duty assessment and penalty were issued in time
  2. 2 Whether the Appellant held, handled or had any involvement in the goods
  3. 3 Whether the penalty has been correctly applied

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the assessment and penalty were issued within the statutory time limits, as the assessing officer did not have sufficient evidence until March 2014. The Appellant was found to be holding the goods within the meaning of the regulations, based on consistent third-party evidence identifying its premises as the collection point. The assessment was made to best judgment, and the penalty was properly applied for non-deliberate, prompted behaviour. Knowledge or intent was not required for liability.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The assessment of excise duty in the sum of £46,749 is upheld.
  • The penalty in the sum of £14,024.70 is upheld.