Willis v Revenue and Customs (EXCISE DUTY RESTORATION OF VEHICLE (see also EXCISE APPEAL) : Review Directed) [2016] UKFTT 631 (TC) (19 January 2016)

Willis v Revenue and Customs (EXCISE DUTY RESTORATION OF VEHICLE (see also EXCISE APPEAL) : Review Directed) [2016] UKFTT 631 (TC) (19 January 2016)

The decision not to restore the vehicle was unreasonable because HMRC failed to consider proportionality as required by its own policy. The review letter did not address proportionality in the appellant's circumstances, constituting an error that rendered the decision unsound.

Citation
[2016] UKFTT 631
Parties
Appellant: Mr Jack Willis; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
19 January 2016
Procedural Posture
Excise Duty Restoration Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; further review directed
Legal Topics
Excise Duty, Vehicle Seizure, Restoration of Seized Goods, Proportionality in Administrative Decisions, HMRC Policy Application
Tax Law Administrative Law Excise Duty Vehicle Seizure Restoration of Seized Goods Proportionality in Administrative Decisions HMRC Policy Application

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

Parties

Mr Jack Willis

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Excise Duty Restoration Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether HMRC's decision not to restore the seized vehicle was unreasonable due to failure to consider proportionality as required by its own policy
  2. 2 Whether the vehicle was correctly treated as 'related' to a laundering plant under HMRC policy

Ratio Decidendi

The decision not to restore the vehicle was unreasonable because HMRC failed to consider proportionality as required by its own policy. The review letter did not address proportionality in the appellant's circumstances, constituting an error that rendered the decision unsound.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; further review directed

Orders

  • HMRC must conduct a further review of the original decision not to restore the vehicle, considering proportionality in light of policy and the tribunal's findings.