In Taylor Construction v HMRC [2017] UKFTT 95 (23 January 2017) the FTT found that a penalty for late registration should be reduced.
Taylor Construction had applied to be registered for VAT nearly six months after exceeding the registration threshold (and therefore nearly five months late) and it appealed against the penalty imposed by HMRC. The appellant contended in particular that its behaviour had not been deliberate and its registration unprompted so that the penalty should be reduced.
The FTT found that the original failure to register on time could not be completely remedied; the object of the penalty is to secure timely compliance not compliance at any time. The FTT added that there may however be reasons to reduce the penalty.
The FTT noted that the only excuse put forward by the appellant was that it had...
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 Taylor Construction v HMRC [2017] UKFTT 95 (23 January 2017) the FTT found that a penalty for late registration should be reduced.
Taylor Construction had applied to be registered for VAT nearly six months after exceeding the registration threshold (and therefore nearly five months late) and it appealed against the penalty imposed by HMRC. The appellant contended in particular that its behaviour had not been deliberate and its registration unprompted so that the penalty should be reduced.
The FTT found that the original failure to register on time could not be completely remedied; the object of the penalty is to secure timely compliance not compliance at any time. The FTT added that there may however be reasons to reduce the penalty.
The FTT noted that the only excuse put forward by the appellant was that it had...
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:
