Mr O C Lam Representative partner in MR O C Lam and Mrs W Lam t/a Ron's Plaice v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Decision date: 3 November 2010
Neutral citation: [2010] UKFTT 535 (TC)
Overall AI summary confidence: high
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 £100 penalties for late filing of a partnership tax return for the year to 5 April 2008. The Tribunal held the blank paper return issued 6 April 2008 was a valid notice requiring a partnership return, the return was filed after both the paper and electronic deadlines, and no reasonable excuse for lateness was proved. HMRC were entitled to require electronic filing via Self Assessment Online or approved third‑party software and were not obliged to provide free software. The penalty determinations were confirmed and the appeal dismissed.
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: medium
A blank paper partnership return issued under s.12AA TMA can constitute a valid notice that a partnership return is required irrespective of the method by which the taxpayer later chooses to file. Where regulations and HMRC directions prescribe approved methods or software for electronic filing, HMRC are entitled to require use of approved third‑party software and are not required to supply free software; failure to provide free software does not excuse late filing where the return is in fact filed after the prescribed deadlines.
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 indicated that even if there had been a defect in the prescribed electronic filing form, that would not have assisted the appellants because their filing occurred after the electronic deadline. The Tribunal also treated arguments based on the Taxpayers' Charter and human rights as not establishing a legal basis to set aside the penalties on the facts before it.