Tajinder Singh Pawar v The Commissioners for HMRC
[2023] UKFTT 81 (TC)
Candido Pereira Rodrigues v The Commissioners for HMRC
13 June 2024
[2024] UKFTT 517 (TC)
First-tier Tribunal
Someone was very late appealing tax penalties. The court said they missed the deadline and didn't have a good excuse, even though a lot of money was at stake. They also tried to delay the case by saying they needed a lawyer, but the court said no. The case shows how important it is to follow the rules when dealing with tax matters.
Key Facts
- •Late appeal against two Personal Liability Notices (PLNs) totaling £737,124.73 issued on July 27, 2018.
- •Appeals lodged on December 18, 2020, significantly past the deadline.
- •Complex procedural history with multiple appeals, representation changes, and non-compliance with Tribunal directions.
- •Appellant initially unrepresented, then represented by Reliance Associates, then Joe Sykes, Advocate, and finally, seemingly advised by Mr. Shahid of NR Legal Solicitors.
- •Appeal struck out due to non-compliance, then reinstated, but adjournment request refused.
- •Appellant argued for a reasonable excuse for delay, citing ineffective advice and potential collusion between HMRC and previous advisors.
- •HMRC opposed adjournment and reinstatement of the appeal.
Legal Principles
Three-stage test for late appeals: (1) Length of delay, (2) Reasons for delay, (3) All circumstances of the case, balancing prejudice to both parties and efficient litigation.
Martland v HMRC [2018] UKUT 178 (TCC)
Adviser's failures are generally treated as litigant's failures when considering late appeals.
Katib [2019] UKUT 0189
Overarching fairness must be considered when deciding whether to adjourn; decision is a balancing exercise.
Transport for London v O’Cathail [2013] EWCA Civ 21 and Dhillon v Asiedu [2012] EWCA Civ 1020
In considering adjournment requests, the onus is on the applicant to prove the need; the court must be satisfied the inability is genuine.
Teinaz v Wandsworth London Borough Council [2002] I.C.R. 1471
Rule 39 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009 governs applications for permission to appeal.
Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009
Section 49 Taxes Management Act 1970 and section 83 VATA 1994 govern time limits for appeals.
Taxes Management Act 1970, VAT Act 1994
Paragraph 19, Schedule 24, Finance Act 2007 governs Personal Liability Notices (PLNs).
Finance Act 2007
Outcomes
Appellant's application for permission to make a late appeal refused.
Significant and unexplained delay (27 months), lack of credible reasons for delay, and weak merits of the underlying appeal, outweighing the appellant's prejudice.
Application for adjournment to instruct counsel refused.
Inconsistent and incredible evidence from the appellant, repeated failure to cooperate with the Tribunal, and significant prejudice to HMRC and the public interest from further delay.
Appeal reinstated but ultimately dismissed.
The appeal was struck out due to non-compliance; however, it was reinstated to consider the late appeal application, which was subsequently dismissed due to the reasons stated above.
Application for full reasons for the decision was deemed out of time and not granted.
The application was made outside the 28-day time limit, and no explanation or application for extension was provided.