Mariusz Soda v The Commissioners for HMRC

Mariusz Soda v The Commissioners for HMRC

The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to consider the appeal against the excise duty assessment because the cigarettes were deemed condemned as illegally imported for commercial use after the appellant failed to challenge the seizure. The penalty for deliberate wrongdoing was properly imposed as the appellant had actual or reckless disregard for the personal allowance, and no special circumstances exist to reduce the penalty.

Parties
Appellant: Mariusz Soda; Respondents: The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal / Judgment on Application to Strike Out and Penalty Appeal
Outcome
Appeal against duty assessment struck out; appeal against penalty dismissed
Legal Topics
Excise Duty, Importation of Cigarettes, Penalty Assessment, Jurisdiction, Procedural Fairness
Tax Law Customs and Excise Excise Duty Importation of Cigarettes Penalty Assessment Jurisdiction Procedural Fairness

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mariusz Soda

Appellant

The Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Tax Appeal / Judgment on Application to Strike Out and Penalty Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the appeal against the excise duty assessment after deemed forfeiture of goods
  2. 2 Whether the penalty for deliberate wrongdoing was properly imposed and if special circumstances exist to reduce it

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to consider the appeal against the excise duty assessment because the cigarettes were deemed condemned as illegally imported for commercial use after the appellant failed to challenge the seizure. The penalty for deliberate wrongdoing was properly imposed as the appellant had actual or reckless disregard for the personal allowance, and no special circumstances exist to reduce the penalty.

Court Disposition

Appeal against duty assessment struck out; appeal against penalty dismissed

Orders

  • Appellant’s appeal against the excise duty assessment is struck out under Rule 8(2)(a)
  • Appellant’s appeal against the penalty assessment is dismissed