In K Thathiah v HMRC [2017] UKFTT 601 (3 August 2017) the FTT found that a senior accounting officer (SAO) had not breached his main duty under FA 2009 Sch 46.
Mr Thathiah was the finance director of the Lenlyn group which provided currency exchange and other financial services. HMRC had imposed a penalty on Mr Thathiah as SAO under FA 2009 Sch 46 for failing to comply with his main duty to take reasonable steps ‘to ensure that a company establishes and maintains appropriate tax accounting arrangements’.
The FTT noted that the existence of material or repeated errors did not necessarily signal breach of the main duty; this was not an absolute duty to ensure that the relevant arrangements exist. It was established that the tax accounting arrangements were not ‘appropriate’. The issue was therefore whether the SAO had taken...
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 K Thathiah v HMRC [2017] UKFTT 601 (3 August 2017) the FTT found that a senior accounting officer (SAO) had not breached his main duty under FA 2009 Sch 46.
Mr Thathiah was the finance director of the Lenlyn group which provided currency exchange and other financial services. HMRC had imposed a penalty on Mr Thathiah as SAO under FA 2009 Sch 46 for failing to comply with his main duty to take reasonable steps ‘to ensure that a company establishes and maintains appropriate tax accounting arrangements’.
The FTT noted that the existence of material or repeated errors did not necessarily signal breach of the main duty; this was not an absolute duty to ensure that the relevant arrangements exist. It was established that the tax accounting arrangements were not ‘appropriate’. The issue was therefore whether the SAO had taken...
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:
