Determination of penalties by First-tier Tribunal
In St Peters Travel Ltd v HMRC (and related appeal) (TC01275 – 13 July) HMRC discovered that two associated companies had failed to declare all the payments which they had made to directors and employees.
They imposed penalties at the rate of 45% of the evaded tax. The companies appealed.
The First-tier Tribunal upheld the penalties finding that the companies’ director was ‘not a credible witness’ and that ‘both companies failed to keep proper records and this amounted to more than mere carelessness.
Judge King held that the abatements made by HMRC were generous and that a penalty of 45% was appropriate.
Why it matters: There have been several cases concerning the extent to which penalties should be abated to take account of the size and gravity of...
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:
Determination of penalties by First-tier Tribunal
In St Peters Travel Ltd v HMRC (and related appeal) (TC01275 – 13 July) HMRC discovered that two associated companies had failed to declare all the payments which they had made to directors and employees.
They imposed penalties at the rate of 45% of the evaded tax. The companies appealed.
The First-tier Tribunal upheld the penalties finding that the companies’ director was ‘not a credible witness’ and that ‘both companies failed to keep proper records and this amounted to more than mere carelessness.
Judge King held that the abatements made by HMRC were generous and that a penalty of 45% was appropriate.
Why it matters: There have been several cases concerning the extent to which penalties should be abated to take account of the size and gravity of...
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: