Westmore Group Ltd v Revenue and Customs (LATE APPEAL - Martland considered) [2021] UKFTT 146 (TC) (04 May 2021)

Westmore Group Ltd v Revenue and Customs (LATE APPEAL - Martland considered) [2021] UKFTT 146 (TC) (04 May 2021)

The delay of almost 11 months in filing the appeal was serious and significant. No good reason for the delay was established, as Mr Shah was not incapacitated and continued to work during the relevant period. The appellant could not distance itself from its representative’s failure, and there was no evidence the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] UKFTT 146 (TC)
Parties
Appellant: Westmore Group Limited; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
04 May 2021
Procedural Posture
First Tier Tribunal (tax) Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal Out of Time
Outcome
Application for extension of time to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Late Appeal, Extension of Time, VAT Input Tax Deduction, Residential Property Conversion, Tribunal Procedure
Tax Law VAT Late Appeal Extension of Time VAT Input Tax Deduction Residential Property Conversion Tribunal Procedure

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

Parties

Westmore Group Limited

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

First Tier Tribunal (tax) Application for Extension of Time to Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal Out of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant should be granted permission to appeal out of time against HMRC's decision to deny VAT credit
  2. 2 Whether there was a good reason for the delay in filing the appeal
  3. 3 Whether the seriousness and significance of the delay preclude extension of time

Ratio Decidendi

The delay of almost 11 months in filing the appeal was serious and significant. No good reason for the delay was established, as Mr Shah was not incapacitated and continued to work during the relevant period. The appellant could not distance itself from its representative’s failure, and there was no evidence the directors took reasonable steps to ensure timely appeal. The need for finality and the absence of clear-cut merits led to refusal of the application.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time to appeal refused

Orders

  • The appellant’s application for permission to appeal out of time is refused.