Tax

Quested (t/a Eyelevel Design Consultants) v Revenue and Customs (INCOME TAX/CORPORATION TAX : Penalty)

[2017] UKFTT TC TC05923xFirst-tier Tribunal (Tax)2017

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

INCOME TAX � partnership tax return - penalties for late filing � whether properly imposed � yes � whether HMRC's statement on a partnership tax return that indicates to a taxpayer that he "may" have to buy commercial software to file online is misleading - yes - whether reasonable excuse � no � whether special circumstances � no �whether penalties proportionate � yes -� appeal dismissed

The Tribunal determined the appeal on 27 May 2017 without a hearing under the provisions of Rule 26 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009 (default paper cases) having first read the Notice of Appeal dated 25 June 2013 (with enclosures),� HMRC�s Statement of Case (with enclosures) prepared by the Respondents on 2 February 2017 and the responses to directions given by this Tribunal on 18 April 2017

This is an appeal against a late filing penalty of �100 (" late filing penalty "), and daily penalties amounting in total to �50 (" daily penalties ") for failure to submit a partnership tax return for the tax year 2011 � 2012 on time.�

(1) In 2004 Mr Quested went into partnership with his daughter.� The partnership traded under the name of Eyelevel Design Consultants.

(2) Mr Quested is the representative member of the partnership. �He welcomed the opportunity to file partnership tax returns online as he thought it would make things easier for both himself and the respondents.

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

Quested (t/a Eyelevel Design Consultants) v Revenue and Customs (INCOME TAX/CORPORATION TAX : Penalty)

[2017] UKFTT TC TC05923xFirst-tier Tribunal (Tax)2017

Cite this case in OSCOLA →

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.