Stephen Pariser v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Decision date: 30 September 2010
Neutral citation: [2010] UKFTT 460 (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 case concerns 14 flat-rate £100 penalties imposed on Mr Pariser for failing to submit land transaction returns within 30 days of the effective date (18 May 2009). The Tribunal found no corroborative evidence that a letter dated 2 June 2009 enclosing a return was posted or received by HMRC, concluded the returns were late, found no reasonable excuse, and upheld all 14 penalties. The appeal was dismissed.
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
A copy of a letter or return produced by the taxpayer, without independent corroborative evidence of posting or delivery, is insufficient to prove that a statutory land transaction return was posted or received; where returns are received after the 30-day filing period and no reasonable excuse is proved, paragraph 3, Schedule 10, FA 2003 penalties apply for each notifiable transaction.
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 noted that even if posting were proved, statutory provisions may permit HMRC to treat a lost or destroyed return as not delivered, limiting reliance on any presumption of posting; and that the Interpretation Act presumption as to service by post can be displaced by contrary provisions in the substantive Act. These observations were not necessary to the Tribunal’s disposal.