[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom VAT & Duties Tribunals Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom VAT & Duties Tribunals Decisions >> D Brown Scaffolding Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2008] UKVAT V20685 (16 May 2008) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKVAT/2008/V20685.html Cite as: [2008] UKVAT V20685

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

 


20685

LONDON TRIBUNAL CENTRE Reference No: LON/2007/171

Copy sent to:

Appellant/Applicant

Respondents

D BROWN SCAFFOLDING LIMITED Appellant

- and -

THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HER MAJESTY'S REVENUE AND CUSTOMS Respondents

Tribunal: RODNEY HUGGINS (Chairman)

PRAFUL DAVDA FCA

Sitting in public in London on 13 May 2008

DIRECTION under Rule 30(8)

THIS APPEAL coming on for hearing this day against the following:

1. surcharge assessments for the periods 02/06 in the sum of £1279.77, 05/06 in the sum of £976.92, 08/06 in the sum of £249.47 and 11/06 in the sum of £56.70
2. mitigation of misdeclaration penalties for 8 periods totalling £6,439 as set out in a letter dated 18 December 2006 from Mr Anthony Power an officer of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs to the Appellant

AND UPON HEARING Mr Jonathan Holl, Advocate for the Respondents who called Mr Anthony Power as a witness

AND the appeal having been heard in the absence of the Appellant in accordance with Rule 26(2) of the Value Added Tax Tribunal Rules 1986 (as amended)

AND this tribunal having heard this appeal and having announced its decision

AND the Respondents by their said representative stating pursuant to Rule 30(8) of the said Rules as amended that they do not require the said decision to be recorded in a written document in accordance with Rule 30(1) of the said Rules

2

THIS TRIBUNAL FINDS as follows:

3. The Appellant does not have any reasonable excuses for the four defaults which resulted in the Respondents making the surcharge assessments under appeal as the Appellant failed to file VAT returns on time and insufficiency of funds is not an excuse under section 71(1)(a) of the Value Added Tax Act 1994
4. The Appellant is not entitled to any mitigation of the misdeclaration penalties as it has not provided any reason for such mitigation and the Appellant was made aware of the occasions when the provisions of scaffolding can in part be zero-rated for VAT purposes immediately following its registration for VAT

AND THIS TRIBUNAL DIRECTS THAT this appeal is DISMISSED but there is to be no direction as to costs

RODNEY P HUGGINS

Chairman

Release Date: 16 May 2008

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2008