Testa v Revenue & Customs [2013] UKFTT 151 (TC) (18 February 2013)

Testa v Revenue & Customs [2013] UKFTT 151 (TC) (18 February 2013)

HMRC's refusal to suspend the penalty was flawed because it was based on a blanket policy excluding 'one-off' errors from suspension, without proper consideration of the specific condition proposed by the appellant. The Tribunal found that the proposed condition—requiring future tax returns to be submitted by a qualified professional—would help avoid further careless inaccuracies and thus met the statutory requirements for suspension.

Citation
[2013] UKFTT 151
Parties
Appellant: David Testa; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
18 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against HMRC Refusal to Suspend Penalty for Careless Inaccuracy in Self Assessment Tax Return / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Income Tax, Penalties, Careless Inaccuracy, Suspension of Penalty, Judicial Review Principles
Tax Law Income Tax Penalties Careless Inaccuracy Suspension of Penalty Judicial Review Principles

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Testa

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal Against HMRC Refusal to Suspend Penalty for Careless Inaccuracy in Self Assessment Tax Return / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether HMRC's refusal to suspend the penalty for a careless inaccuracy was flawed under Schedule 24 Finance Act 2007
  2. 2 Whether the proposed suspension condition (use of a professional adviser for future returns) was appropriate under the legislation

Ratio Decidendi

HMRC's refusal to suspend the penalty was flawed because it was based on a blanket policy excluding 'one-off' errors from suspension, without proper consideration of the specific condition proposed by the appellant. The Tribunal found that the proposed condition—requiring future tax returns to be submitted by a qualified professional—would help avoid further careless inaccuracies and thus met the statutory requirements for suspension.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • HMRC is ordered to suspend the penalty imposed on the appellant.