TC09625 - [2025] UKFTT 01066 (TC)

Fecha: 19-Ago-2025

Mr Thornton’s submissions on behalf of UWG

Mr Thornton’s submissions on behalf of UWG

48.

Mr Thornton accepted that UWG faced the burden of proving that HMRC had not assessed an earlier holder, but said that much of the evidence relevant to that issue was held by HMRC. He submitted that granting the Application was in the interests of justice, so as to allow the Tribunal fairly to adjudicate the case, and relied on the case law on disclosure set out above.

49.

I agree with Mr Thornton for the reasons he gave, and have incorporated his main submissions in the next following part of this judgment.

50.

Mr Thornton also pointed out that the principles established by the case law had changed over time, so it was important for UWG to see the evidence on which HMRC had relied in 2012 and 2013 when making the assessments. In particular, those assessments were issued:

(1)

before Davison had established that HMRC did not have discretion and were instead obliged to assess at the earliest duty point; and

(2)

before WR and Perfect had established that a haulier could be a “holder”, even though he had no rights over the goods.