Chaney v Revenue & Customs (INCOME TAX - Penalties)

Factual and Procedural Background

This opinion concerns an application for permission to bring a late appeal against decisions notified by the tax authorities. The appellant sought an extension of the statutory 30-day time limit for filing the appeal, with delays ranging from at least 365 days to 1,185 days. The matter was heard by the First-tier Tribunal, Tax Chamber, at Leeds Magistrates Court and Family Hearing Centre.

Legal Issues Presented

1. Whether the appellant’s delay in filing the appeal was excusable under the applicable legal standards.
2. How the tribunal should apply the overriding objective and principles of compliance with procedural rules in considering an extension of time for a late appeal.
3. The impact of the delay on the parties, including prejudice to the tax authority and the wider interests of justice.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The tribunal outlined a structured approach to applications for extension of time, considering:

• The purpose of the time limit;
• The length and seriousness of the delay;
• Whether there was a reasonable explanation for the delay;
• The consequences for the parties of granting or refusing the extension.

The tribunal emphasized that the overriding objective requires cases to be dealt with fairly and justly, balancing all relevant factors without giving special weight to any single factor. It adopted the stricter approach to compliance with procedural rules as set out in the cited authorities, rejecting any justification for a more relaxed approach in tax tribunals.

The tribunal applied an objective test to determine whether the appellant had a reasonable excuse, assessing whether a responsible taxpayer, with similar experience and in similar circumstances, would have acted as the appellant did. The appellant’s failures to comply with time limits, involving delays from one to over three years, were deemed serious and significant. The appellant failed to establish a reasonable excuse for the delay.

Furthermore, the tribunal found that allowing the late appeal would cause prejudice to the tax authority in terms of time and resources and that the substantive appeals were weak. Consequently, it would be unjust to permit the late appeals.

Holding and Implications

The tribunal refused permission to bring the late appeals.

The direct effect of this decision is that the appellant’s appeals are not allowed to proceed due to non-compliance with the statutory time limits and lack of reasonable excuse. The decision reinforces the principle that compliance with procedural rules in tax tribunals must be strictly observed, supporting efficient and proportionate litigation. No new precedent was established beyond affirming the application of established legal principles.