BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

First-tier Tribunal (Tax)


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> First-tier Tribunal (Tax) >> Hudson v Revenue & Customs [2012] UKFTT 661 (TC) (28 August 2012)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/TC/2012/TC02332.html
Cite as: [2012] UKFTT 661 (TC)

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


Ian Hudson v Revenue & Customs (28 August 2012)
INCOME TAX/CORPORATION TAX
Appeal

[2012] UKFTT 661 (TC)

 

TC02332

 

 

 

Appeal number: TC/2012/05146

 

TYPE OF TAX – PAYE – extra statutory concession – no jurisdiction – appeal dismissed. 

 

 

FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL

TAX CHAMBER

 

 

 

IAN HUDSON

Appellant

 

 

 

 

- and -

 

 

 

 

 

THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HER MAJESTY’S

Respondents

 

REVENUE & CUSTOMS

 

 

 

TRIBUNAL:

JUDGE  RICHARD BARLOW

 

 

 

 

 

Sitting in public at North Shields on 28 August 2012.

 

 

No appearance by the Appellant

 

Mr Aidan Boal for the Respondents

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2012


DECISION

 

 

1.             Mr Hudson underpaid PAYE in the year 2010-11 and asked the respondents to exercise the discretion they have under extra-statutory concession ESC A19 to waive collection of the underpayment from him which they have been collecting by having adjusted his code for the year 2011-12.

2.             By a letter dated 9 February 2012 the respondents notified the appellant that they would not exercise that discretion in his favour, indeed it appears they consider that the concession does not apply to Mr Hudson in the circumstances of this case.

3.             The respondents cited to me and relied upon the Decision of the First Tier Tribunal in the case of Michael Prince and Others –v- The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (Judge Bishopp) reference TC 01852.  Judge Bishopp held in that case, after full argument, that the First Tier Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to consider whether an extra-statutory concession applies or should have been allowed.  I agree with and will follow the reasoning and conclusion of that Tribunal decision.

4.             As Mr Hudson has made it clear in his notice of appeal that he does not dispute that there had been an underpayment and that his only ground of appeal is that the concession should have been allowed, there is no disputed decision for which the First Tier Tribunal has jurisdiction and so the appeal must be dismissed accordingly.

5.             This document contains full findings of fact and reasons for the decision. Any party dissatisfied with this decision has a right to apply for permission to appeal against it pursuant to Rule 39 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009. The application must be received by this Tribunal not later than 56 days after this decision is sent to that party.  The parties are referred to “Guidance to accompany a Decision from the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)” which accompanies and forms part of this decision notice.

 

 

 

RICHARD BARLOW

TRIBUNAL JUDGE

 

RELEASE DATE:  24 October 2012

 

 


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/TC/2012/TC02332.html