Trenbe UK Limited v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 8 January 2025
Neutral citation: [2025] UKFTT 20 (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
Trenbe applied to amend and admit late appeals concerning VAT periods 12/20–08/22 after HMRC sent several letters whose status was unclear; the Tribunal treated Trenbe's 20 October 2023 application as a late new appeal and admitted it out of time. Trenbe's separate 9 November 2023 protective appeal was not determined as unnecessary, and its December 2024 applications (about time-limit wording and sampling) were dismissed. HMRC was permitted to amend its statement of case to remove erroneous time-limit references. Directions for case management were given and parties were told of their right to apply for permission to appeal.
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
The Tribunal allowed a late appeal where revenue communications caused reasonable uncertainty about whether assessments had been made, and where admitting the late appeal was justified on balance because the appellant had acted promptly once confusion was clarified and HMRC suffered limited prejudice; a late application to amend grounds can function as a late notice of appeal if it provides the information required by the Tribunal’s procedure.
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 observed that sampling large transaction volumes can be appropriate in principle but is premature where the respondent needs access to full documentation and the appellant’s position on transaction-by-transaction assessment is inconsistent; it also noted that early-stage amendments asserting time-limit defences linked to withdrawn or misdescribed assessments are unlikely to succeed.