Giles v Revenue & Customs (EXCISE DUTY TOBACCO : Hand rolling) [2018] UKFTT 536 (TC) (13 September 2018)

Giles v Revenue & Customs (EXCISE DUTY TOBACCO : Hand rolling) [2018] UKFTT 536 (TC) (13 September 2018)

The tribunal is bound by statutory deeming provisions and case law (Jones and Race) that, since the appellant did not challenge the seizure in condemnation proceedings, the goods are deemed to have been imported for commercial use and are liable to duty and penalty. The appellant's circumstances do not amount to reasonable excuse or special circumstances, and the penalty is proportionate.

Citation
[2018] UKFTT 536
Parties
Appellant: Brian Giles; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
13 September 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Assessment for Excise Duty and Penalty / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Excise Duty, Tobacco Importation, Penalties, Commercial Use Vs Personal Use, Jurisdiction of Tribunal, Proportionality of Penalties
Tax Law Customs and Excise Excise Duty Tobacco Importation Penalties Commercial Use Vs Personal Use Jurisdiction of Tribunal Proportionality of Penalties

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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brian Giles

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal Against Assessment for Excise Duty and Penalty / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant is liable to excise duty and penalty for hand rolling tobacco imported into the UK
  2. 2 Whether the goods were for personal or commercial use
  3. 3 Whether the penalty is proportionate

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal is bound by statutory deeming provisions and case law (Jones and Race) that, since the appellant did not challenge the seizure in condemnation proceedings, the goods are deemed to have been imported for commercial use and are liable to duty and penalty. The appellant's circumstances do not amount to reasonable excuse or special circumstances, and the penalty is proportionate.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Assessment for excise duty of £928 and penalty of £204 upheld