03 8151 MUSHARAF AHMED DEAN Mr D S Porter Mrs G Pratt Manchester 20 July The Appellant did not appear and was not represented Miss M Mayoh, of counsel, instructed by the Solicitor's Office of HM Customs and Excise, for the Respondents 
                                                                                                                                 E00787
	RESTORATION  — trip to buy tobacco and beer for a wedding — 50 kg hand-rolling tobacco and 4,800 litres Stella Artois beer — 3,500 guests expected over several days — Appellant did not attend tribunal — customs acted reasonably — appeal dismissed 

MANCHESTER TRIBUNAL CENTRE

 
 	
	MUSHARAF AHMED DEAN	Appellant

	- and -

	THE COMMISSIONERS OF CUSTOMS AND EXCISE	Respondents

				Tribunal:	 Mr D S Porter (Chairman)
						 Mrs G Pratt (Member)	

Sitting in public in Manchester on 20 July 2004

The Appellant did not appear and was not represented

Miss M Mayoh, of counsel, instructed by the Solicitor's Office of HM Customs and Excise, for the Respondents

	© CROWN COPYRIGHT 2004

DECISION

1.	This is an appeal by Mr Musharaf Ahmed Dean (the Appellant) against a decision on review of the Commissioners of Customs and Excise by letter of 31st July 2003 refusing to restore certain excise goods consisting of 50kg hand rolling tobacco; 4,800 litres of Stella Artois beer seized on 15th March 2003. The vehicle, registration number Y341 JWR, was hired and has been returned to the owner The Appellant says that the excise goods were purchased for a wedding, which would extend over several days. At least 3500 guests were expected to attend the celebrations. The Respondents allege that the excise goods were purchased for commercial purposes.
The parties
2.	Miss Mayoh of counsel appeared for the Respondents and produced a bundle of documents for the Tribunal. As no one appeared for the Appellant, this Tribunal determined to proceed under rule 26(2) of the Value Added Tax Rules 1986 (as amended).
The Facts
3.	Miss Mayoh advised that the Appellant was intercepted at Dover Eastern Docks when he was travelling in a Salford Hire Van with Farooq Ahmed Dean and Ian Crawford. He had been to France and it subsequently transpired that he had been to Belgium as well. The van was carrying 50 kg of hand-rolling tobacco and 4,800 litres of Stella Artois beer. He had not purchased any wine and stated that he might have to go back again for that. Neither Mr Farooq Ahmed Dean nor Mr Ian Crawford stayed to be interviewed. The Appellant agreed to stay but was mistakenly interviewed as if he was Farooq Ahmed Dean who appeared to be known to Customs.
4.	The Appellant produced correspondence from the Ramada Jarvis Hotel at Manchester Road, Blackrod, Bolton confirming the arrangements for his sister’s wedding. The Hotel had advised that it could cater for 500 guests but that the Hotel would supply the drink and that it was not acceptable for the wedding party to bring their own beer. It would appear that the bar was closed and the wedding party provided their own drink.
5.	A wedding invitation was sent out by his father and mother Mr and Mrs Said Ahmed Dean for the wedding on the 20th April 2003 and a copy of the invitation appears in the bundle at pages 32 and 33.
6.	Messrs Burton Copeland solicitors wrote on behalf of the Appellant and confirmed that the goods had been purchased for the wedding. This was not an event that would take one day. Ordinarily the festivities lasted for 4 to 5 days. There were over 500 guests at the Hotel on the first day.
7.	We find as fact the matters set out in paragraphs 3 to 6 above.
Summing up
8.	Miss Mayoh submitted that the quantity of goods imported was enormous.  The beer equated to 8,450 pints and the tobacco to 85000 cigarettes (using an average of 85 cigarettes to a pouch). The Appellant had misled the customs officers as to where he had been and was vague as to the quantities he had purchased. It was not considered reasonable that the beer was of one brand and a full strength lager. The quantities amounted to 16. 9 pints of beer and 2 pouches of tobacco for every guest – women and children included. The Hotel had indicated that the wedding party could not provide their own beer and it was not credible that the Hotel would allow the wedding party to produce this quantity of beer.  Nor was it credible that 3500 guest attended the wedding even over the period of 4 to 5 days.
Decision
9.	My colleague and I have considered the facts and have decided that the Respondents acted reasonably in refusing to restore the goods and the appeal is dismissed. We also award cost of £500 against the Appellant who neither came to the hearing nor gave any indication that he would not be attending.

MR D S PORTER
CHAIRMAN
Release Date: 26 August 2004
MAN/03/8151