Eatock & Ors v Customs & Excise [2003] UKVAT(Excise) E00464 (04 August 2003)

EXCISE DUTY � Respondents refusal to restore cigarettes seized from first and third appellants � whether decision not to restore reasonable � no evidence adduced by respondents showing that appellants held goods for a commercial purpose � appeals allowed

EXCISE DUTY � Respondents refusal to restore car seized from second appellant as having been used to carry first appellants' cigarettes � finding that appellant innocent of any involvement of importation of excise goods by third appellant � appeal allowed

Mr Michael Talbot, solicitor of Messrs Pearson Hinchcliffe, Oldham, for the three appellants

Mr D Mohyuddin of counsel instructed by the Solicitor for the Customs and Excise for the Respondents

Both Mr S and Mrs E denied that goods were in vehicle � Mr E was argumentative although not aggressive in any way. I further explained to him that he had confirmed to me that the receipts he produced did not relate to his goods and his explanation had been that the receipts must relate to his co-traveller's goods (prior to me questioning co-traveller). The receipts did not relate to his or co-traveller's goods. He could not explain why he held receipts for so many goods or who is carrying them."