Paul Maurice Roche v Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs
Decision date: 19 November 2009
Neutral citation: [2009] UKFTT 313 (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 HMRC's April 2008 Notice requiring Paul Roche to provide security for VAT under Schedule 11 para 4(2). HMRC based the Notice on a long history of late returns, prolonged default surcharge liability and a substantial outstanding VAT debt; Mr Roche produced late, incomplete and unsubstantiated evidence of assets and receipts. The Tribunal found on the balance of probabilities that HMRC reasonably required security to protect the revenue and dismissed the 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
Where a taxpayer required by the Tribunal to produce corroborating documentary evidence fails to provide reliable, timely and substantiated accounts, valuations and creditor/asset details, the Tribunal may properly conclude that HMRC reasonably required security under Schedule 11 para 4(2); a history of persistent late returns, prolonged default surcharge participation and a substantial unpaid VAT liability are relevant factors supporting such a requirement.
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 notes record that payment of penalties and interest, or last‑minute payments by the taxpayer, do not necessarily remove the risk to the revenue at the time the Notice was issued; assertions of forthcoming receipts are insufficient unless properly substantiated and timely disclosed.