![UT/2019/000009 - [2024] UKUT 00176 (TCC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_ICfrj4g.png){kind=logo}
Conclusions
Conclusion
For the reasons above, Mr Ali’s appeal is dismissed.
JUDGE SWAMI RAGHAVAN
JUDGE MARK BALDWIN
Release date: 18 June 2024
- Heading
- Introduction
- Law
- Case-law
- Assessment of earlier duty point
- Meaning of “holding” in the Regulations?
- FTT Decision and background
- Grounds of Appeal
- Discussion
- Does the error mean the FTT’s decision should be set aside?
- Ground 2 – Palm Palace Limited, not Mr Ali, had sufficient control in order to be “holding” for the purposes of Regulation 10(1) of the Regulations
- Ground 3 – the FTT failed to give sufficient reasons for the conclusion that Mr Ali was “holding” tobacco for Regulation 10(1) purposes
- Conclusions