Mauheed Johngir & Anor v The Commissioners for HMRC
[2024] UKFTT 274 (TC)
Giles Ellis v The Commissioners for HMRC
24 April 2023
[2023] UKFTT 388 (TC)
First-tier Tribunal
A company director appealed a tax penalty. The tax authorities wanted to use late evidence; the judge let them but warned them to be on time next time. The director also asked for some extra information, some of which the judge gave him and some of which the judge refused because it wasn't relevant to the case.
Key Facts
- •Appeal by Giles Ellis against a personal liability notice for £36,259, representing 50% of a penalty imposed on ICL (his company).
- •ICL was de-registered for suspected VAT fraud (Ablessio principles) and denied input tax (Kittel).
- •ICL's appeals were struck out due to non-compliance.
- •ICL went into liquidation.
- •Respondents' application to admit seven late witness statements from ICL appeal.
- •Appellant's application for disclosure of information and a document relating to the Insolvency Service's investigation of the other ICL director.
Legal Principles
Tribunal procedure for admitting late evidence, balancing probative value, prejudice, case management, and fairness.
Masstech Corporation Limited v HMRC [2011] UKFTT 649
Personal liability for VAT penalties under Section 69D VATA 1994.
VATA 1994
Attribution of knowledge in VAT fraud cases (Kittel principles).
Kittel
De-registration for suspected VAT fraud (Ablessio principles).
Ablessio
Disclosure of information and documents relevant to issues in the proceedings.
Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) Rules 2009, Rule 16
Attribution of agent's knowledge to partners in VAT cases.
Sandham t/a Premier Metals Leeds v HMRC [2020] UKUT 193
Outcomes
Respondents' application to admit late witness statements allowed, but with an Unless Order for future compliance.
Balancing prejudice to both parties and ensuring a fair hearing. The Respondents' past non-compliance necessitates the Unless Order.
Appellant's application for disclosure of information allowed; application for disclosure of the Insolvency Service document dismissed.
Information on penalty calculation and clarification of 'end user' is relevant. Insolvency Service report on the other director is not relevant due to the principle of knowledge attribution in VAT cases (Premier Metals).