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 appeal against a decision of the Respondents with respect to the imposition of a default surcharge and being a reasonable excuse appeal as defined by rule 2 of the Value Added Tax Tribunals Rules 1986 (as amended) ("the rules") coming on for hearing this day
And upon hearing Jon Webster, director, for the Appellant and Bernard Haley, of the Solicitor's office of H M Customs and Excise, for the Respondents
And the Appellant and the Respondents by their said representatives stating pursuant to rule 30(8) of the rules that they do not require the said decision to be recorded in a written document in accordance with rule 30(1) of the rules
This tribunal finds that the default was de minimis having regard to the pattern of payments and delivery of tax returns in previous quarters and to the honest intention of the Appellant to make payment on time in respect of the quarter in dispute and that accordingly there exists a reasonable excuse within the meaning of section 59(7)(b) of the Value Added Tax Act 1994 in respect of the default surcharge under appeal
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.