Mrs Lyn West v Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs
Decision date: 20 August 2010
Neutral citation: [2010] UKFTT 442 (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 challenged a 5% surcharge for late payment of 2007/08 tax after an online payment instruction was made on 27 February 2009 but HMRC received funds on 2 March 2009. The tribunal found the tax remained unpaid for the relevant default period, rejected the argument that initiating the electronic transfer constituted payment, and confirmed the surcharge. The appellant did not establish a reasonable excuse and 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
For the purposes of surcharge liability, payment is treated as occurring when HMRC actually receives the funds, not when a taxpayer merely initiates an electronic payment instruction; minor procedural or wording defects in HMRC communications do not invalidate a surcharge where the taxpayer was not misled and the statutory requirements were met.
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 judgment contrasted electronic transfers with cheques, noting a cheque may give rise to a cause of action on receipt (distinguishing its treatment from electronic payments), and observed that HMRC guidance that internet payments normally take three working days to reach HMRC is relevant evidence of expected transfer times.