Express Agency v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Decision date: 3 February 2010

Neutral citation: [2010] UKFTT 55 (TC)

Overall AI summary confidence: high

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: high

Express Agency appealed a penalty for filing its 2007/08 partnership return late, having submitted a paper return after HMRC's deadlines and after unsuccessful attempts to use HMRC's online system. The Tribunal found no reasonable excuse for late filing and dismissed the appeal, rejecting reliance on an unexplained HMRC concession in a separate case as insufficiently identical to excuse the appellant.

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

Where statute and HMRC guidance require partnership returns to be filed online using commercial software, filing late on paper attracts the statutory penalty unless the taxpayer can show a reasonable excuse; a taxpayer claiming parity with another case must demonstrate truly identical circumstances, and an unexplained different treatment by HMRC in another case does not oblige the Tribunal to set aside a penalty.

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 complaints about inconsistent or allegedly unfair treatment by HMRC are matters for the Revenue Adjudicator rather than the Tribunal, and noted that a professional bookkeeper preparing multiple returns is expected to be aware of the online filing requirement.

Warning

Chunk contains duplicated paragraphs and repetitive material. Notes contain duplicated and repetitive material; they may be noisy though key facts and holdings are present.

Source links

Judgment page Judgment PDF Judgment XML