Dunleavy v Revenue & Customs (INCOME TAX/CORPORATION TAX : Penalty) [2018] UKFTT 691 (TC) (23 November 2018)

Dunleavy v Revenue & Customs (INCOME TAX/CORPORATION TAX : Penalty) [2018] UKFTT 691 (TC) (23 November 2018)

The appellant did not have a reasonable excuse for late filing as he was aware of his obligations, had previously filed returns, and the notice to file was sent to his address on record. There were no special circumstances justifying reduction of the penalties. The penalties were lawfully imposed under Schedule 55 Finance Act 2009.

Citation
[2018] UKFTT 691 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: Ciaran Dunleavy; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
23 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Income Tax Penalty Appeal / First Tier Tribunal Determination Without Hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Income Tax, Self Assessment, Late Filing Penalties, Reasonable Excuse, Special Circumstances

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

Parties

Ciaran Dunleavy

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Income Tax Penalty Appeal / First Tier Tribunal Determination Without Hearing

  1. 1 Whether the appellant had a reasonable excuse for late filing of self-assessment tax return
  2. 2 Whether penalties should be reduced due to special circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant did not have a reasonable excuse for late filing as he was aware of his obligations, had previously filed returns, and the notice to file was sent to his address on record. There were no special circumstances justifying reduction of the penalties. The penalties were lawfully imposed under Schedule 55 Finance Act 2009.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Late filing penalties totalling £930 are confirmed against the appellant.