Powar v Revenue and Customs (Penalties - Personal Liability Notice - Company of which Appellant was sole director subject to VAT assessment on Kittel basis) [2024] UKFTT 415 (TC) (17 May 2024)

Powar v Revenue and Customs (Penalties - Personal Liability Notice - Company of which Appellant was sole director subject to VAT assessment on Kittel basis) [2024] UKFTT 415 (TC) (17 May 2024)

The Tribunal found that Mr Powar knew the transactions were connected to fraudulent evasion of VAT, making the VAT returns inaccurate and the inaccuracies deliberate. As sole director, actions of the company were attributable to him. The PLN was correctly calculated and no special circumstances warranted reduction.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] UKFTT 415 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: Anandpreet Singh Powar; Respondents: The Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
17 May 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Personal Liability Notice, VAT Assessment, Deliberate Inaccuracies, Kittel Principle, Penalties
Tax Law VAT Fraud Personal Liability Notice VAT Assessment Deliberate Inaccuracies Kittel Principle Penalties

Source-derived case record

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anandpreet Singh Powar

Appellant

The Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether inaccuracies in company's VAT returns existed
  2. 2 Whether such inaccuracies were deliberate
  3. 3 Whether deliberate inaccuracies were attributable to the appellant

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that Mr Powar knew the transactions were connected to fraudulent evasion of VAT, making the VAT returns inaccurate and the inaccuracies deliberate. As sole director, actions of the company were attributable to him. The PLN was correctly calculated and no special circumstances warranted reduction.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • PLN confirmed in the sum of £74,823.63