Tax

K1 Construction Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Rev 1)

[2010] UKFTT TC TC00629First-tier Tribunal (Tax)2010

Get the AI brief for this case

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.

Quick orient — first passages from judgment

Construction Industry Scheme -- appeal against removal of gross payment status -- whether "reasonable excuse" within paragraph 12 (3) Schedule 11 Finance Act 2004 � whether defaults to be disregarded under Regulation 32 The Income Tax (Construction Industry Scheme) Regulations 2005 -- whether Appellant failed "reason to expect" test in paragraph 12 (7) Schedule 11 Finance Act 2004 -- appeal dismissed.

Sitting in public at Holborn Bars, 138-142� Holborn, London EC1 2NQ on 15 April 2010

Bruce Robinson, Appeals and Reviews Unit, HM Revenue and Customs, for the Respondents

The Appellant ("K1") submitted its notice of appeal on 24 December 2009 in respect of a decision of HM Revenue and Customs ("HMRC") dated 5 October 2009 withdrawing gross payment status within the Construction Industry Scheme (" the Scheme ") pursuant to ss 57-68 of the Finance Act 2004. Since the decision of 5 October 2009 was wrongly addressed, HMRC did not oppose the grant by the Tribunal of permission to give notice of appeal after the relevant time under s 49 Taxes Management Act 1970 and accordingly, as a preliminary matter, the Tribunal gave its permission.

Section 66 Finance Act 2004 permits HMRC to cancel a person's registration for gross payment. Section 66 provides, so far as is relevant to this appeal:

Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.

Read the full judgment elsewhere

Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.

More Tax cases

Ferguson & Anor v Revenue and Customs (STAMP DUTY LAND TAX - residential property - whether paddock was part of garden or grounds of dwelling - paddock was part of grounds)

[2026] UKFTT TC 238

MWL International Ltd & Anor v Revenue and Customs (NATIONAL INSURANCE CONTRIBUTIONS - agreement with inspector of taxes that certain cars would be "pooled cars" for NICs purposes if various conditions satisfied - HMRC subsequently sought to collect NICs retrospectively - whether HMRC estopped from doing so - whether the FTT had jurisdiction to decide whether Appellants had legitimate expectation that decisions would not be retrospective)

[2026] UKUT TCC 62

BGC Services Holdings LLP v Revenue and Customs (Determinations under Reg 80 of the PAYE Regs - whether it appeared to HMRC that there may be tax payable)

[2026] UKFTT TC 558

Best Cosmetics Ltd v Revenue and Customs (IMPORT VAT - Postponed VAT Accounting - importer not VAT registered - post-clearance demand notices issued for unpaid VAT - no evidence that postponed VAT was accounted for)

[2026] UKFTT TC 236

Ivey v Revenue and Customs (Strike Out - Jurisdiction)

[2026] UKFTT TC 233

Revenue and Customs v Electric Mobility Euro Ltd & Anor (Discovery assessments - extended time limit assessments - penalty for inaccuracy in a return - deliberate inaccuracy - whether deliberate inaccuracy necessarily involves dishonesty - whether HMRC required to specifically plead and prove dishonesty - whether the FTT erred in failing to explain how the appellant's conduct might not involve dishonesty)

[2026] UKUT TCC 37

Common Room

Discussion

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.

This case is reproduced verbatim from the public judgment published by The National Archives under the UK Government's Open Government Licence v3.0. If you appear in this case and believe it should not be published — for example because your conviction was quashed on appeal, you have statutory anonymity, or for other privacy reasons — request removal here.

Tax