In R Wells v HMRC (TC02172 – 22 August) a painter (W) became liable to register for VAT from January 2007 but failed to do so. HMRC discovered this in 2011 and imposed a penalty. W appealed contending that the penalty should be mitigated because he had accounted for income tax on the full amount of his turnover whereas if he had registered for VAT at the appropriate time he should only have accounted for income tax on the VAT-exclusive part of his turnover. The First-tier Tribunal accepted this contention and mitigated the penalty by 100%.
Why it matters: HMRC imposed a penalty on the grounds that the appellant had failed to register for VAT. However the First-tier Tribunal accepted the appellant’s contention that the penalty was unfair because he had already accounted for income tax on...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
In R Wells v HMRC (TC02172 – 22 August) a painter (W) became liable to register for VAT from January 2007 but failed to do so. HMRC discovered this in 2011 and imposed a penalty. W appealed contending that the penalty should be mitigated because he had accounted for income tax on the full amount of his turnover whereas if he had registered for VAT at the appropriate time he should only have accounted for income tax on the VAT-exclusive part of his turnover. The First-tier Tribunal accepted this contention and mitigated the penalty by 100%.
Why it matters: HMRC imposed a penalty on the grounds that the appellant had failed to register for VAT. However the First-tier Tribunal accepted the appellant’s contention that the penalty was unfair because he had already accounted for income tax on...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
2734558d-601b-48a3-8ae3-ae3513a00429.tmb-editorspic.jpg?sfvrsn=1fc4692d_1)
