CFL Fuels Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Excise Duty - whether HMRC's decision not to restore forfeited fuel and vehicle one HMRC could not reasonably have arrived at) [2025] UKFTT 1068 (TC) (02 September 2025)

CFL Fuels Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Excise Duty - whether HMRC's decision not to restore forfeited fuel and vehicle one HMRC could not reasonably have arrived at) [2025] UKFTT 1068 (TC) (02 September 2025)

The Tribunal found that HMRC's decision not to restore the fuel and vehicle was unreasonable because the factual basis for forfeiture, as notified to CFL, did not conclusively establish that the fuel was laundered, only that there was a breach engaging section 24(4) HODA. As such, HMRC failed to properly consider the possibility of innocent contamination, which was not precluded by the deemed facts. The decision was therefore one which HMRC could not reasonably have arrived at, and a further review was ordered.

Citation
[2025] UKFTT 1068
Parties
Appellant: CFL Fuels Ltd; Respondents: The Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
02 September 2025
Procedural Posture
Excise Duty Restoration Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax) Substantive Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Excise Duty, Forfeiture, Restoration of Seized Goods, Hydrocarbon Oil Duties, Customs and Excise Management, Administrative Law, Proportionality, Reasonableness of Decision
Tax Law Customs and Excise Excise Duty Forfeiture Restoration of Seized Goods Hydrocarbon Oil Duties Customs and Excise Management Administrative Law +2 more

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CFL Fuels Ltd

Appellant

The Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Excise Duty Restoration Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax) Substantive Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether HMRC's decision not to restore forfeited fuel and vehicle was one no reasonable decision-maker could have arrived at
  2. 2 Whether the factual basis for forfeiture precluded consideration of 'innocent contamination'
  3. 3 Whether HMRC's restoration policy was lawfully and proportionately applied

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that HMRC's decision not to restore the fuel and vehicle was unreasonable because the factual basis for forfeiture, as notified to CFL, did not conclusively establish that the fuel was laundered, only that there was a breach engaging section 24(4) HODA. As such, HMRC failed to properly consider the possibility of innocent contamination, which was not precluded by the deemed facts. The decision was therefore one which HMRC could not reasonably have arrived at, and a further review was ordered.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • HMRC's decision to refuse restoration is to cease to have effect.
  • HMRC is required to conduct a further review of the original decision, taking into account the Tribunal's findings regarding the factual basis for forfeiture and the possibility of innocent contamination.