TC09517 - [2025] UKFTT 00527 (TC)

In summary Miss Ritchie submitted as follows:

It is inconceivable that either the appellant or the agent had not received copies of the relevant documents, including the view of the matter letter, as asserted by the agent in correspondence. In any event, it is abundantly clear that the appellant received the letter of 9 November 2021. It then took a further two years and three months for her to notify her appeal to the tribunal. This is a significant and serious delay.

The only reason which appears to have been given by the appellant for the delay is poor health. HMRC is sorry that the appellant has suffered poor health. But insufficient evidence has been provided to explain why this prevented either her or the agent notifying the appeal in time. Her health was not mentioned in the notice of appeal nor in correspondence following the closure notices and the view of the matter letter. Indeed, the appellant was able to contact HMRC by telephone in February 2020.

No submissions were made in the notice of appeal, nor indeed during the hearing, regarding failure to receive certain correspondence.

The balance of prejudice weighs in favour of rejecting the application. Officer Hutchings has now retired from HMRC and HMRC will therefore be prejudiced in that it will not be possible to call her as a witness. The appellant’s case has obvious weaknesses. No evidence has been supplied to explain the unexplained cash deposits which Officer Hutchings was unable to reconcile. HMRC’s document retention policy of six years means that evidence and information required to defend this appeal is no longer easily accessible.

The appellant was depressed when she got the closure notices. She consulted her GP and received medication.

She was travelling to Pakistan during the period in question, and her father died in 2022.