Mehta v Revenue & Customs (High Income Child Benefit Charge penalty) [2020] UKFTT 183 (TC) (08 April 2020)

Mehta v Revenue & Customs (High Income Child Benefit Charge penalty) [2020] UKFTT 183 (TC) (08 April 2020)

The appellant's ignorance of the law and alleged non-receipt of HMRC notifications did not constitute a reasonable excuse. HMRC was not obliged to notify the appellant individually, and the penalties were correctly calculated and applied with maximum reductions for disclosure. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2020] UKFTT 183
Parties
Appellant: Gaurav Mehta; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
08 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Tax Penalty Appeal / First Tier Tribunal Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
High Income Child Benefit Charge, Failure to Notify Liability, Tax Penalties, Reasonable Excuse
Tax Law High Income Child Benefit Charge Failure to Notify Liability Tax Penalties Reasonable Excuse

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

Parties

Gaurav Mehta

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Tax Penalty Appeal / First Tier Tribunal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant had a reasonable excuse for failing to notify liability to the High Income Child Benefit Charge (HICBC)
  2. 2 Whether HMRC was obliged to notify the appellant of the legislative change
  3. 3 Whether the penalties were correctly calculated and applied

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant's ignorance of the law and alleged non-receipt of HMRC notifications did not constitute a reasonable excuse. HMRC was not obliged to notify the appellant individually, and the penalties were correctly calculated and applied with maximum reductions for disclosure. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Penalties of £535.40 for tax years 2013/14 to 2016/17 upheld