SK Bains v Revenue & Customs (INCOME TAX/CORPORATION TAX : Penalty) [2018] UKFTT 436 (TC) (06 August 2018)

SK Bains v Revenue & Customs (INCOME TAX/CORPORATION TAX : Penalty) [2018] UKFTT 436 (TC) (06 August 2018)

The appellant did not establish a reasonable excuse for failing to pay the tax due under the APN or to meet her instalment obligations. Illness, stress, financial pressures, and misunderstanding of surcharge calculation did not objectively prevent payment, nor was sufficient evidence provided to link these factors to the default. Inability to pay, even if caused by voluntary commitments, is not a reasonable excuse under the statute. The surcharges were correctly imposed and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
[2018] UKFTT 436 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: SK Bains; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
06 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Income Tax/corporation Tax Penalty Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Substantive Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Accelerated Payment Notice, Income Tax Surcharges, Reasonable Excuse, Tax Penalties, Appeals Procedure

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

Parties

SK Bains

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Income Tax/corporation Tax Penalty Appeal / First Tier Tribunal (tax Chamber) Substantive Decision

  1. 1 Whether the appellant had a reasonable excuse for failing to pay the tax due under an accelerated payment notice, thereby avoiding surcharges imposed under Section 59C Taxes Management Act 1970.

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant did not establish a reasonable excuse for failing to pay the tax due under the APN or to meet her instalment obligations. Illness, stress, financial pressures, and misunderstanding of surcharge calculation did not objectively prevent payment, nor was sufficient evidence provided to link these factors to the default. Inability to pay, even if caused by voluntary commitments, is not a reasonable excuse under the statute. The surcharges were correctly imposed and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The imposition of the two surcharges is confirmed.