20470
LONDON TRIBUNAL CENTRE				Reference No: LON/2007/1271

								Copy sent to:

								Appellant/Applicant

								Respondents

	JOHN RONALD KENWAY	Appellant

	- and -

	THE COMMISSIONERS FOR HER MAJESTY’S REVENUE AND CUSTOMS	 Respondents

	Tribunal: NICHOLAS ALEKSANDER (Chairman)
                                                  PRAFUL DAVDA                                                                  

	Sitting in public in London on  21 November 2007

	DIRECTION
under Rule 30(8)

THIS APPEAL against a decision of the Respondents with respect to a Default Surcharge being a reasonable excuse appeal as defined by rule 2 of the Value Added Tax Tribunals Rules 1986 coming on for hearing today

AND UPON HEARING the Appellant in person and Simon Chambers, Advocate, of the Solicitors Office of HM Revenue & Customs for the Respondents

AND THIS TRIBUNAL having extended the time for service of the notice of appeal until 24 July 2007 (being the date on which the notice was received by the Tribunal Centre) 

AND THIS TRIBUNAL having heard this appeal under Rule 26(2) and having announced its decision

AND THE parties present at the hearing or by their said representatives stating pursuant to Rule 30(8) of the Value Added Tax Tribunal Rules 1986 that they do not require the said decision to be recorded in a written document in accordance with Rule 30(1) 

THIS TRIBUNAL FINDS THAT the Appellant attempted to pay the VAT and file his VAT return due in respect of the return for the period November 2006 to January 2007 online.  The Appellant had previously enrolled with the Government Gateway, but was unaware that he required an additional password to file his VAT returns.  He called Customs’ helpline and was told to file his return by fax.  He did this the following day (1 March), and sent a cheque in respect of the VAT due some time later.  According to Customs’ records, the cheque was received on 24 March 2007, which was well after the due date (even taking into account any extensions that are given for filing electronically).  The Appellant thought that he had sent the cheque on an earlier date but was unable to produce any evidence of the date on which the cheque was posted.  Accordingly the Appellant did not have a reasonable excuse for their default.

AND THIS TRIBUNAL DIRECTS THAT this appeal is dismissed.

AND that there is to be no direction as to costs

NICHOLAS ALEKSANDER
	Chairman
	Release Date: 30 November 2007

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2007