Kent Couriers Ltd v Revenue And Customs (EXCISE DUTY AND WRONGDOING PENALTY - whether the Appellant was "holding" alcohol at the excise duty point) [2024] UKFTT 145 (TC) (20 February 2024)

Kent Couriers Ltd v Revenue And Customs (EXCISE DUTY AND WRONGDOING PENALTY - whether the Appellant was "holding" alcohol at the excise duty point) [2024] UKFTT 145 (TC) (20 February 2024)

The Appellant was not 'holding' the alcohol at the excise duty point because it did not have physical possession or de facto control, and its legal control was highly circumscribed and held on behalf of its customer. Therefore, it was not liable for excise duty. However, the Appellant was liable to a wrongdoing...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] UKFTT 145 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: Kent Couriers Limited; Respondents: The Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
20 February 2024
Procedural Posture
Tax Appeal (excise Duty and Wrongdoing Penalty) / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Judgment
Outcome
Appeal against excise duty assessment allowed; appeal against wrongdoing penalty dismissed in part.
Legal Topics
Excise Duty, Wrongdoing Penalty, Liability for Excise Duty, Holding of Goods, Commercial Transportation, Due Diligence, Penalty Assessment
Tax Law European Union Law Excise Duty Wrongdoing Penalty Liability for Excise Duty Holding of Goods Commercial Transportation Due Diligence +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kent Couriers Limited

Appellant

The Commissioners for His Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Tax Appeal (excise Duty and Wrongdoing Penalty) / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellant was 'holding' alcohol at the excise duty point under Regulation 13 of the Excise Goods (Holding, Movement and Duty Point) Regulations 2010 and Article 33 of Directive 2008/118/EC.
  2. 2 Whether the Appellant was liable to a wrongdoing penalty under Schedule 41 to the Finance Act 2008.

Ratio Decidendi

The Appellant was not 'holding' the alcohol at the excise duty point because it did not have physical possession or de facto control, and its legal control was highly circumscribed and held on behalf of its customer. Therefore, it was not liable for excise duty. However, the Appellant was liable to a wrongdoing penalty as it was concerned in the movement of the goods and did not have a reasonable excuse, though the penalty was reduced to the minimum for non-deliberate acts with prompted disclosure due to the quality of its disclosure.

Court Disposition

Appeal against excise duty assessment allowed; appeal against wrongdoing penalty dismissed in part.

Orders

  • Excise duty assessment of £36,176 set aside.
  • Wrongdoing penalty reduced to £10,852 for non-deliberate acts with prompted disclosure.