Luca Delivery Limited v The Commissioners for HMRC

Luca Delivery Limited v The Commissioners for HMRC

Luca Delivery Limited was not entitled to CJRS payments for Ms Sartor because she was not included in an RTI return submitted on or before 28 February 2020 or 19 March 2020, and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to relax this statutory requirement or to allow retrospective corrections to confer entitlement.

Parties
Appellant: Luca Delivery Limited; Respondents: The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal / Judgment After Remote Video Hearing
Outcome
Appeal refused
Legal Topics
Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (cjrs), Real Time Information (rti) Submissions, Income Tax Assessments, Statutory Appeals, Jurisdiction of Tribunal
Tax Law Administrative Law Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (cjrs) Real Time Information (rti) Submissions Income Tax Assessments Statutory Appeals Jurisdiction of Tribunal

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Luca Delivery Limited

Appellant

The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Tax Appeal / Judgment After Remote Video Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an employee omitted from RTI submissions before 19 March 2020 can be retrospectively added for CJRS eligibility
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to relax statutory requirements for CJRS claims
  3. 3 Whether correction of RTI returns after the relevant date affects CJRS entitlement

Ratio Decidendi

Luca Delivery Limited was not entitled to CJRS payments for Ms Sartor because she was not included in an RTI return submitted on or before 28 February 2020 or 19 March 2020, and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to relax this statutory requirement or to allow retrospective corrections to confer entitlement.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused

Orders

  • First assessment confirmed in reduced amount of £1,734.35 (removing amount relating to Mr Padilha)
  • Second assessment of £3,055 upheld