YT Medical Limited & Anor v The Commissioners for HMRC

Decision date: 31 May 2024

Neutral citation: [2024] UKFTT 496 (TC)

Overall AI summary confidence: medium

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: medium

This case concerns YT Medical Ltd and an individual appellant seeking permission to bring late appeals against two corporation tax discovery assessments and against penalty assessments issued by HMRC. The First-tier Tribunal found that a 6 December 2022 letter amounted to a valid, in‑time appeal against the penalties, that there was no satisfactory evidence HMRC served the 29 November 2021 discovery assessment (so a 25 March 2022 letter was treated as a valid appeal), and that an out‑of‑time appeal against the 4 April 2022 assessments should be allowed. The tribunal granted the applications to bring the appeals out of time.

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 document will be treated as a valid notice of appeal if, applying an objective reader test, it conveys disagreement with HMRC's decision and requests HMRC change it even without using the word "appeal." HMRC bears the evidential burden to prove service of assessments, and system printouts/screenshots alone may be insufficient without primary evidence of process or witness evidence.

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 an agent's failure to forward documents or lodge appeals may be attributed to the taxpayer for timeliness purposes but is a factor to be weighed when assessing prejudice and conduct. The tribunal also suggested it may infer non‑receipt where a recipient who routinely engages with HMRC shows no response to an assessment.