Ibrahim Amir v The Commissioners for HMRC
[2024] UKFTT 589 (TC)
99p Recycling Ltd v The Commissioners for HMRC
4 January 2024
[2024] UKFTT 13 (TC)
First-tier Tribunal
A company didn't pay taxes or apply for hardship, so the court threw out their case. They tried to get it back, but were a bit late. Even though they were only slightly late, the court decided against them because they'd already missed other deadlines. So, their case stays thrown out.
Key Facts
- •99P Recycling Ltd imported face masks and was assessed customs duty of £168,415.50.
- •99P appealed to the Tribunal but failed to pay the duty or apply for hardship as per Tribunal directions.
- •The Tribunal issued an Unless Order, and subsequently struck out the appeal for non-compliance.
- •99P applied for reinstatement of the appeal, six days late.
- •HMRC objected to the reinstatement application.
- •99P claimed financial hardship and the high cost of obtaining legal advice prevented them from complying with the order.
Legal Principles
Tribunal must strike out proceedings if it lacks jurisdiction (e.g., duty unpaid, no hardship application).
Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009, Rule 8(2)
Tribunal may strike out proceedings for non-compliance with directions.
Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009, Rule 8(3)(a)
Appellant may apply for reinstatement if proceedings struck out under Rule 8(1) or 8(3)(a).
Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009, Rule 8(5)
Reinstatement application must be made within 28 days of notification of striking out.
Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009, Rule 8(6)
When considering late applications, the Tribunal applies a three-stage test: (1) length of delay; (2) reasons for default; (3) all circumstances, balancing prejudice to both parties and efficient litigation.
Martland v HMRC [2018] UKUT 178 (TCC)
In reinstatement applications, the Tribunal generally disregards the merits of the underlying appeal, unless the appellant's case is 'unanswerable'.
Chappell v The Pensions Regulator [2019] UKUT 2009
Section 16(3) Finance Act 1994: Appeal not entertained unless duty paid or hardship certificate obtained.
s16(3) Finance Act 1994
Outcomes
Reinstatement application admitted but appeal remains struck out.
While the six-day delay in the reinstatement application was considered short, the overall pattern of delays and failure to comply with previous directions and the Unless Order, coupled with insufficient reasons for the delay, outweighed the short delay.