MBP Europe Limited v The Commissioners for HMRC

Decision date: 3 September 2025

Neutral citation: [2025] UKFTT 1069 (TC)

Overall AI summary confidence: high

AI Notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary or obiter dicta summary shown on this page is AI-generated, provided only to help users assess potential relevance more quickly, and may be wholly inaccurate. No liability is accepted for the accuracy of any such summary, regardless of any AI confidence rating shown. Users should check the underlying decision and obtain appropriate legal advice rather than relying on any summary.

Short overview

This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.

AI confidence in this short overview: high

This appeal concerned a Schedule 26 VAT late payment penalty assessed after HMRC asserted it had posted a Payments on Account (POA) letter and the taxpayer’s Direct Debit had been cancelled. The tribunal found that, although HMRC’s records showed the POA letter was posted, the appellant credibly established non‑receipt through reliable internal post procedures, discovered the missed Direct Debit on 18 November 2024 and paid the VAT the same day. The tribunal held those facts amounted to a reasonable excuse and allowed the appeal, discharging the penalty.

Ratio decidendi

This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.

AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: high

The tribunal treated as binding for this case that a taxpayer can displace the statutory presumption of delivery by giving credible evidence of a reliable internal post‑management system coupled with non‑receipt; and that where a reasonable excuse ceases, prompt remedial payment without unreasonable delay (here, same‑day payment on discovery) can negate liability for a Schedule 26 late payment penalty.

Obiter dicta

This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.

AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium

The tribunal commented (obiter) that regular weekly cash‑review procedures can constitute reasonable internal controls affecting whether earlier detection was required, and that HMRC’s reliance on its own posting records alone may be insufficient to defeat credible evidence of non‑receipt.

Warning

Chunk contains significant duplication of material (repeated passages). Notes contain significant duplication of material but appear to record the key findings; none

Source links

Judgment page Judgment PDF Judgment XML