La Mancha Limited v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs

Decision date: 10 December 2010

Neutral citation: [2010] UKFTT 638 (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

La Mancha Limited appealed a £500 penalty for late filing its 2008–09 Employers' Annual Return. The Tribunal found the Taxes Management Act monthly penalty regime produced the £500 figure given the filing date and that neither the accountants' one‑off software error nor HMRC's failure to send reminders amounted to a reasonable excuse. The appeal was dismissed and the penalty confirmed.

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 a return is filed late the Taxes Management Act monthly penalty regime applies to calculate penalties (including counting part months) and HMRC's ordinary guidance or practice about reminders does not displace the statutory regime; absence of reminders from HMRC, when there is no statutory duty to issue them, is not a reasonable excuse.

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 it must apply the statute rather than HMRC guidance when determining liability and penalties, and that a single, unsupported software error affecting one client is unlikely to constitute a reasonable excuse.