In HMRC v M H Katib [2019] UKUT 189 (19 June 2019) the FTT found that the ‘spectacular’ incompetence of the taxpayer’s adviser was not a ‘good reason’ for a late appeal.
Mr Katib was the director of a company MDM which traded in metal. HMRC disallowed claims that MDM made for credit for input VAT and charged MDM penalties for inaccuracies in its VAT returns. MDM became insolvent and did not pay the penalties and HMRC issued personal liability notices (PLNs) to Mr Katib. He eventually appealed late and sought permission for a late appeal.
As the FTT had made an error of law in ignoring ‘the importance of respecting statutory time limits’ the UT set aside the FTT’s decision.
Like the FTT the UT accepted that Mr Katib’s adviser had not given him competent advice and had misled him as to...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
In HMRC v M H Katib [2019] UKUT 189 (19 June 2019) the FTT found that the ‘spectacular’ incompetence of the taxpayer’s adviser was not a ‘good reason’ for a late appeal.
Mr Katib was the director of a company MDM which traded in metal. HMRC disallowed claims that MDM made for credit for input VAT and charged MDM penalties for inaccuracies in its VAT returns. MDM became insolvent and did not pay the penalties and HMRC issued personal liability notices (PLNs) to Mr Katib. He eventually appealed late and sought permission for a late appeal.
As the FTT had made an error of law in ignoring ‘the importance of respecting statutory time limits’ the UT set aside the FTT’s decision.
Like the FTT the UT accepted that Mr Katib’s adviser had not given him competent advice and had misled him as to...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
