Stockler v Revenue & Customs [2012] UKFTT 404 (TC) (25 June 2012)

Stockler v Revenue & Customs [2012] UKFTT 404 (TC) (25 June 2012)

The Tribunal held that the findings of negligence by the Special Commissioners in relation to the partnership accounts applied equally to Mr Stockler's personal tax returns, justifying the imposition of a penalty. The Tribunal found no basis for abatement for disclosure, as there was no voluntary disclosure by Mr...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] UKFTT 404
Parties
Appellant: William Stockler; Respondents: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
25 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Income Tax Penalty Appeal / Final Determination of Penalty Quantum After Remittal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Income Tax Penalties, Negligence in Tax Returns, Quantum of Penalty, Disclosure and Co Operation in Tax Investigations, Human Rights in Tax Penalties
Tax Law Income Tax Penalties Negligence in Tax Returns Quantum of Penalty Disclosure and Co Operation in Tax Investigations Human Rights in Tax Penalties

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Stockler

Appellant

The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Income Tax Penalty Appeal / Final Determination of Penalty Quantum After Remittal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether findings of negligence in partnership accounts apply to personal tax returns
  2. 2 Whether the penalty quantum determined by HMRC is appropriate, excessive, or insufficient
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal can consider a late-raised human rights argument regarding penalty notification

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that the findings of negligence by the Special Commissioners in relation to the partnership accounts applied equally to Mr Stockler's personal tax returns, justifying the imposition of a penalty. The Tribunal found no basis for abatement for disclosure, as there was no voluntary disclosure by Mr Stockler. The Tribunal also found that the late human rights argument could not be entertained, as it was outside the scope of the remittal from the High Court and had not been previously raised. The penalty quantum determined by HMRC (70% of culpable tax) was appropriate and not excessive or insufficient.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The penalty determination by HMRC is confirmed and left unchanged.