Elder v Revenue & Customs (EXCISE DUTY TOBACCO : Other) [2018] UKFTT 588 (TC) (09 October 2018)

Elder v Revenue & Customs (EXCISE DUTY TOBACCO : Other) [2018] UKFTT 588 (TC) (09 October 2018)

The appellant imported 8,800 cigarettes and 0.5 kg of hand rolling tobacco, far exceeding the personal allowance, and passed through the Green Channel without declaring them. His explanations were inconsistent and not credible. The tribunal found he acted dishonestly to evade duty, and the penalties imposed were proper. Minimal cooperation justified only a 5% reduction; inability to pay is not a ground for reduction.

Citation
[2018] UKFTT 588 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: Robert Elder; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
09 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Civil Evasion Penalties (excise and Customs Duty) / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; penalties confirmed.
Legal Topics
Excise Duty, Customs Duty, Civil Evasion Penalties, Dishonesty, Importation of Tobacco Products
Tax Law Customs and Excise Law Excise Duty Customs Duty Civil Evasion Penalties Dishonesty Importation of Tobacco Products

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Elder

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal Against Civil Evasion Penalties (excise and Customs Duty) / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant dishonestly evaded excise and customs duty by importing tobacco products above the personal allowance
  2. 2 Whether the penalties imposed were proper and should be reduced

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant imported 8,800 cigarettes and 0.5 kg of hand rolling tobacco, far exceeding the personal allowance, and passed through the Green Channel without declaring them. His explanations were inconsistent and not credible. The tribunal found he acted dishonestly to evade duty, and the penalties imposed were proper. Minimal cooperation justified only a 5% reduction; inability to pay is not a ground for reduction.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; penalties confirmed.

Orders

  • The penalties of £847 (Customs Duty) and £2,184 (Excise Duty) are confirmed.
  • No further reduction in penalty is granted.