![TC09514 - [2025] UKFTT 00524 (TC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_7HSuEAV.png){kind=logo}
The consequence of using a duty override code was that no customs duty was paid on the imported steel
The consequence of using a duty override code was that no customs duty was paid on the imported steel.
In a letter dated 4 October 2023, Officer Miah explained to the appellant that (having checked its customs declarations for the relevant period, and having set out the way in which safeguarding duty is imposed as well as the way in which the appellant might be eligible to claim quota) he intended to charge safeguarding duty of the amount set out above and the reasons for it (basically by using a duty override code instead of inserting the relevant quota order number, the declaration was invalid as an application to access the steel quota).
- Heading
- INTRODUCTION
- THE LAW
- Right of appeal
- The Rules
- Case law
- EVIDENCE AND FACTS
- The consequence of using a duty override code was that no customs duty was paid on the imported steel
- He followed up that letter by issuing the decision letter which confirmed his original view, on 7 November 2023
- The appellant requested a statutory review of the decision and in the review conclusion letter dated 20 December 2023 (“ the review conclusion letter ”) the reviewing officer upheld the decision
- That letter from the tribunal also explained that the appellant should rectify the error before resubmitting the notice of appeal, and that if this meant that the notice of appeal was submitted outsid
- DISCUSSION
- No weight should be attached to the fact that the appellant is a litigant in person
- Our view
- Conclusions