Day v Revenue & Customs (INCOME TAX/CORPORATION TAX : Penalty) [2019] UKFTT 133 (TC) (26 February 2019)

Day v Revenue & Customs (INCOME TAX/CORPORATION TAX : Penalty) [2019] UKFTT 133 (TC) (26 February 2019)

The appellant did not have a reasonable excuse for failing to notify HMRC of her chargeability to capital gains tax, as reliance on her husband's inadequate research and advice was not reasonable for a taxpayer in her position. No special circumstances existed to reduce or remove the penalty, and the penalty imposed was proportionate to the gravity of the infringement.

Citation
[2019] UKFTT 133 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: CF Day; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
26 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Income Tax/corporation Tax Penalty Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Substantive Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Capital Gains Tax, Failure to Notify Chargeability, Penalties, Reasonable Excuse, Special Circumstances, Proportionality
Tax Law Capital Gains Tax Failure to Notify Chargeability Penalties Reasonable Excuse Special Circumstances Proportionality

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 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CF Day

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Income Tax/corporation Tax Penalty Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Substantive Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant had a reasonable excuse for failing to notify HMRC of chargeability to capital gains tax under section 7 TMA 1970
  2. 2 Whether special circumstances exist to reduce or remove the penalty
  3. 3 Whether the penalty imposed is proportionate

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant did not have a reasonable excuse for failing to notify HMRC of her chargeability to capital gains tax, as reliance on her husband's inadequate research and advice was not reasonable for a taxpayer in her position. No special circumstances existed to reduce or remove the penalty, and the penalty imposed was proportionate to the gravity of the infringement.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed