TC09578 - [2025] UKFTT 00856 (TC)

Fecha: 09-Jun-2025

Introduction

Introduction

With the consent of the parties, the form of the hearing was V (video), all parties attended remotely via Microsoft Teams.

Prior notice of the hearing had been published on the gov.uk website, with information about how representatives of the media or members of the public could apply to join the hearing remotely in order to observe the proceedings. As such, the hearing was held in public.

This is an appeal by Ms Sayrun Lamuth, the Appellant, against late payment penalties for the tax years ending 5 April 2021, 5 April 2022, and 5 April 2023 charged to her under Schedule 56 Finance Act 2009 (“Sch. 56”).

The Appellant was charged the following penalties:

Tax Year ending 5 April	Date of Penalty	Legislation	Description	Amount
2021	17/9/2024	Para 3(2) Sch.56	30-day late payment penalty	£128
2021	17/9/2024	Para 3(3) Sch.56	6-month late payment penalty	£128
2021	17/9/2024	Para 3(4) Sch.56	12-month late payment penalty	£128
2022	17/9/2024	Para 3(2) Sch.56	30-day late payment penalty	£132
2022	17/9/2024	Para 3(3) Sch.56	6-month late payment penalty	£132
2022	17/9/2024	Para 3(4) Sch.56	12-month late payment penalty	£132
2023	17/9/2024	Para 3(2) Sch.56	30-day late payment penalty	£135
2023	17/9/2024	Para 3(3) Sch.56	6-month late payment penalty	£135
			TOTAL	£1,050

The Appellant’s Notice of Appeal was late, however the Respondents acknowledge that the Appellant’s appeal to them was made in time but was incorrectly treated as being late. Accordingly, they do not object to the appeal being heard out of time. The Tribunal allows the late appeal to proceed.

The documents to which we were referred were in a hearing bundle of 135 pages and the Respondents’ Statement of Reasons of 25 pages.

The grounds of appeal as set out in the Appellant’s Notice of Appeal dated 29 November 2024 primarily address the reasons why the appeal was not lodged on time. Further grounds have been set out in correspondence. Those grounds were:

(1)

The Appellant received a letter from the Respondent dated 17 March 2017, addressed to her ex-husband, which granted him approval to receive rental income with no tax deducted. Upon reading this letter she assumed that rents he received are not liable to tax in the UK because he is not British and was not resident in the UK. She misunderstood the letter and assumed that the rental income she was receiving was not liable to tax.

(2)

On 31 July 2019 the Appellant called the Respondent and was told she did not need to file any returns from the tax year 2018-2019 onwards.

(3)

On 27 March 2024 the Appellant called the Respondents. During that call, the Appellant explained that she had been in receipt of rental income since 2017. The advisor explained to the Appellant that she had misunderstood the position with respect to the rental income. The advisor also confirmed that she had been told in 2019 that she did not need to complete returns from 2018-19 onwards and that she was told that there wouldn’t be any interest and penalties for late payments.

(4)

The Appellant completed tax returns and sent them to the Respondent by post on 18 May 2024 and on 8 June 2024. She received her SA Tax calculation letter dated 28 August 2024 on 5 September 2024. She did not know how to make a payment until she called the Debt Management team. She made total payment on 6 September 2024.

The issues considered by the Tribunal were:

(1)

Whether the late payment penalties were correctly assessed.

(2)

Whether the late payment penalty notices had been correctly issued.

(3)

Whether Ms Lamuth had a reasonable excuse for the late payment of the tax.

(4)

Whether HMRC’s decision in relation to special reduction of the penalties was flawed.