Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

Foster and Sons Limited v The Commissioners for HMRC

[2024] UKFTT 1009 (TC)
A company appealed late VAT payment penalties. The court said the tax office didn't prove they sent one notice, cancelling that penalty. The other penalties stood because the company hadn't told the tax office of their address change, even though the company had trouble paying on time. The amounts of the remaining penalties were reduced.

Key Facts

  • Foster & Sons Limited appealed against VAT default surcharges totaling £9,068.03 for late payments in accounting periods 08/21, 11/21, and 08/22.
  • Surcharges were levied at increasing rates (5%, 10%, 15%) due to prior defaults.
  • HMRC conducted reviews upholding the surcharges.
  • Foster & Sons argued the surcharges were incorrectly issued and that there was a reasonable excuse for late payments.
  • Foster & Sons' principal business address was changed in HMRC's systems to Tudor Court in January 2024, but they did not receive the surcharge notices sent to their previous address at Oakbank.
  • Oakbank address was a temporary workspace within an Amazon warehouse which was unmanned for several months in 2021.
  • Foster & Sons changed banking arrangements in May 2021, leading to unexpected delays in VAT payments.
  • HMRC provided evidence of posting surcharge notices to Oakbank; no mail was returned as undelivered.

Legal Principles

Liability for default surcharge arises under s 59 VATA for late filing or payment of VAT.

Value Added Tax Act 1994 (VATA)

Service of surcharge notice is crucial; deemed effected by proper addressing, pre-payment, and posting under s 7 Interpretation Act 1978, unless contrary proven.

s 98 VATA; s 7 Interpretation Act 1978

Reasonable excuse under s 59(7) VATA is a matter of fact considered in light of all circumstances; insufficiency of funds or reliance on others is not a reasonable excuse.

s 59(7) VATA; Rowland v HMRC [2006] STC (SCD) 536; Christine Perrin v HMRC [2018] UKUT 0156 (TCC)

Burden of proof rests with HMRC to demonstrate correct issuance of surcharges and with Foster & Sons to demonstrate reasonable excuse.

Case law and VATA

Outcomes

Appeal allowed in part.

HMRC failed to prove service of the surcharge notice for period 02/21. For subsequent periods, service was deemed proper despite Foster & Sons' failure to notify HMRC of the address change. No reasonable excuse found for late payments.

Surcharge for 02/21 period overturned.

HMRC did not prove the surcharge notice was sent.

Surcharges for periods 08/21, 11/21, and 08/22 upheld but rates adjusted.

Service of notices deemed proper; no reasonable excuse for late payments found.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.