[2025] UKUT 00315 (TCC)

The FTT was considering an appeal against HMRC’s decisions to reject the Appellant’s claim for drawback on the basis of a number of reasons. HMRC’s original decision included a reason that the Appellant had failed to provide evidence that the duty stamps were obliterated in accordance with the DSR and also failed to show that appropriate notice of obliteration had been given. HMRC’s review decision on this topic only referred to a failure to provide confirmation that the obliteration had been carried out in line with guidance.

Regulation 7(1)(b) of The Excise Goods (Drawback Regulations) 1995 (“EGDR”), provides relevantly in relation to claims for Excise Duty drawback that claimants must comply with conditions set out in public notices:

“7.— (1) Subject to paragraph (2) below and without prejudice to any condition imposed by, or in accordance with section 133 of the Act, every eligible claimant shall—

(a)

save as the Commissioners may otherwise allow, comply with the conditions imposed by these Regulations; and

(b)

in addition to those conditions, comply with such other conditions as the Commissioners see fit to impose in a notice published by them and not withdrawn by a further notice.

… .”

There is no dispute that EN207 is a public notice for the purpose of Regulation 7(1)(b) of the EGDR (in this appeal there is no material difference between the 2019 and 2021 editions of the notice which variously applied). Consequently, the question arises as to whether any condition in EN207, as prescribed by Parliament, is required to be complied with for entitlement to excise duty drawback. Paragraph 4.5 of EN 207 provides (and provided at all material times):