Lucy Anne Watt v The Commissioners for HMRC
Decision date: 9 September 2022
Neutral citation: [2022] UKFTT 329 (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 late filing penalties under Sch.55 for 2019/20. The tribunal found HMRC had sent the notice to file but that Ms Watt genuinely and objectively reasonably believed she had filed online and paid; contradictory HMRC communications and delay in informing her otherwise meant she had a reasonable excuse until HMRC's 2.8.21 letter, and she remedied the default promptly by filing a paper return. The appeal was allowed and the penalty discharged.
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 applied the Upper Tribunal approach to "reasonable excuse" and concluded that a taxpayer's genuine and objectively reasonable belief that an online submission was completed can constitute a reasonable excuse for late filing, at least until the taxpayer receives clear notification to the contrary; contradictory or unclear communications from HMRC may sustain that belief.
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 judgment suggests (obiter) that a first-time online filer is not automatically required to verify receipt with HMRC as a matter of course, analogous to reliance when sending a paper return, and that unexplained or delayed communications from HMRC can undermine reliance on their online messages; HMRC should provide timely and clear responses and explanations of technical issues.