Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
This decision concerns my refusal of an application for an order for costs by the Appellant following the withdrawal by HMRC from the appeal.
On 27 June 2013 the Tribunal received a notice of appeal from the Appellant�s solicitors in respect of an Excise Duty assessment for �113,513 in respect of assorted beer, cider and wine which HMRC alleged to be in the Appellant�s possession in circumstances where the Appellant was liable to unpaid Excise Duty on it.
The Tribunal invited HMRC to notify it in due course of the outcome of the Appellant�s hardship application, when notifying the appeal to them on 2 July 2013.
HMRC wrote to the Tribunal on 12 July 2013, asking for a two month stay in order to consider the question of hardship.
HMRC wrote again to the Tribunal on 30 August 2013, informing it that they had written to the Appellant on 22 July 2013 to confirm that they had withdrawn their disputed decision (to raise the Excise Duty assessment).� As the Appellant had not withdrawn its appeal, they requested the Tribunal to contact the Appellant to establish its intentions.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.