BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
United Kingdom VAT & Duties Tribunals Decisions |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom VAT & Duties Tribunals Decisions >> Nagi v Revenue & Customs [2008] UKVAT V20795 (03 September 2008) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKVAT/2008/V20795.html Cite as: [2008] UKVAT V20795 |
||
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
20795
LONDON TRIBUNAL CENTRE Reference No: LON/2008/0809
Copy sent to
Appellant Respondents
IQBAL SINGH NAGI
Appellant
- and -
THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HER MAJESTY'S
REVENUE AHD CUSTOMS
Respondents
Tribunal : DR A N BRICE (Chairman)
MR J N BROWN CBE FCA
Sitting in public in London on 3 September 2008
DIRECTION
Under Rule 30(8)
THIS was an appeal against a default surcharge for the accounting period ending on 31 January 2008; the return and tax were due on 29 February 2008 and the tax was not received until 1 April 2008
WE HEARD Mrs Pauline Crinnion for the Respondents
THERE WAS NO APPEARANCE by or on behalf of the Appellant and so we heard the appeal in the absence of the Appellant under Rule 26(2)
WE FIND THAT the Appellant asserted in his notice of appeal that a cheque for the tax had been sent earlier but had been dishonoured by his bank; when he heard what had happened he had sent another cheque
OUR DECISION IS that we are not satisfied that the tax was despatched at such a time and in such a manner that it was reasonable to expect that it would be received by the Respondents by 29 February 2008 and that we are not satisfied that the Appellant had a reasonable excuse for the tax not being received in time
AT THE CONCLUSION of the appeal we announced our decision to dismiss the appeal and the Respondents, as the only party present at the hearing, agreed that they did not want a full written decision
WE THEREFORE DIRECT that the appeal be dismissed
RULE 26(3) provides that the Tribunal may set aside a direction given in the absence of a party on the application of that party served at the Tribunal centre within fourteen days after the date when the direction was released
DR A N BRICE
Chairman
Release Date: 3 September 2008
© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2008
