Philip McBean v The Commissioners for HMRC

Decision date: 28 May 2026

Neutral citation: [2026] UKFTT 799 (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

This appeal concerned whether Mr McBean should have been VAT‑registered from 1 October 2013, whether he had a reasonable excuse under Schedule 41 para 20 for failing to notify and so avoid a penalty, and whether HMRC's VAT assessments could be challenged at the Tribunal. The FTT found his taxable supplies in the year to August 2013 exceeded the registration threshold, dismissed his claimed reasonable excuse (a mistaken belief that the threshold related to profit), upheld the Schedule 41 penalty, and held the VAT assessments were not appealable because no returns had been filed. 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

The judgment indicates that a taxpayer’s mistaken belief that the registration threshold refers to profit rather than turnover does not constitute a reasonable excuse for failure to notify under Schedule 41 para 20 on the facts of this case; and that where no VAT returns have been submitted for the relevant periods, the Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to hear an appeal against HMRC’s assessments for those periods.

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 (without deciding) that using the earlier penalty end‑date of 11 March 2020 reduced the penalty compared with using the later cessation date, and observed that HMRC’s discretionary decisions about collection or suspension of a penalty are not matters the Tribunal can review in the appeal.

Source links

Judgment page Judgment PDF Judgment XML