![[2024] UKUT 00321 (TCC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_ICfrj4g.png){kind=logo}
Ground 6 – exceptional hardship
Ground 6 – exceptional hardship
The Applicant is seeking to say that the fact that he is unable to pay the duty and penalties should have been taken into account. That is not something which in these circumstances, the FTT could take into account. As it correctly identified in the Decision, the authority of Katib makes that clear when it stated:
- Heading
- JUDGE TRACEY BOWLER
- When can an appeal be made?
- The Decision
- Grounds of appeal
- My decision
- Consideration of the Grounds
- Ground 1: the FTT erred by taking into account the merits of the appeal
- Ground 2: the FTT applied too high a threshold by referring to the need for a “compelling” case which is higher than the threshold of “more than just arguable”
- Ground 3: the Applicant’s case is not rather weak
- Ground 4: an appeal would need to consider whether HMRCs’ decision-making was proportionate
- “A wide discretion is conferred on the Government and Parliament in devising a
- Ground 5 - the FTT has failed to take into account the large amount of the penalties and has granted HMRC a windfall
- Ground 6 – exceptional hardship
- “The core point is that (on the evidence available to the FTT) Mr Katib would suffer hardship if he (in effect) lost the appeal for procedural reasons. However, that again is a common feature which co
- Conclusions