N Bevan Ltd v Revenue and Customs (PROCEDURE : Other) [2016] UKFTT 674 (TC) (07 October 2016)

N Bevan Ltd v Revenue and Customs (PROCEDURE : Other) [2016] UKFTT 674 (TC) (07 October 2016)

NBL breached Regulations 7, 8, 19, and 20 by failing to demonstrate adequate customer due diligence, ongoing monitoring, record-keeping, and risk-based policies. Reliance on HMRC's online agent system was insufficient. The penalty was reduced to £3,094, reflecting 10% of gross profit less mitigation for limited risk, but not the full 50% originally allowed due to lack of cooperation and failure to heed warnings.

Citation
[2016] UKFTT 674 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: N Bevan Limited; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
07 October 2016
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Regulatory Penalty / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Money Laundering Regulations, Customer Due Diligence, Record Keeping, Risk Assessment, Regulatory Penalties
Regulatory Law Tax Law Financial Services Law Money Laundering Regulations Customer Due Diligence Record Keeping Risk Assessment Regulatory Penalties

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

Parties

N Bevan Limited

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal Against Regulatory Penalty / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether N Bevan Limited breached the Money Laundering Regulations 2007 (Regulations 7, 8, 19, 20)
  2. 2 Whether the penalty imposed by HMRC was appropriate and proportionate

Ratio Decidendi

NBL breached Regulations 7, 8, 19, and 20 by failing to demonstrate adequate customer due diligence, ongoing monitoring, record-keeping, and risk-based policies. Reliance on HMRC's online agent system was insufficient. The penalty was reduced to £3,094, reflecting 10% of gross profit less mitigation for limited risk, but not the full 50% originally allowed due to lack of cooperation and failure to heed warnings.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Penalty reduced to £3,094 for breach of Regulations 7, 8, 19, and 20 of the Money Laundering Regulations 2007