In Harold Wiesenfeld and Alex Strom v HMRC [2019] UKUT 0301 the UT upheld penalties for carelessness. The taxpayers failed to provide timely evidence as to the nature of their business venture in Poland and the tribunal ruled that verbal evidence amounted to hearsay.

The parties' tribunal procedure did not go as intended.

The FTT found that penalties were due and dismissed the appeal. They decided that the new witness’ evidence was inadmissible: it amounted to hearsay and was introduced without notice.

The taxpayers’ appealed to the Upper Tribunal (UT).

Useful guides on this topic

Losses
How to claim, how to offset & restrictions

Penalties: Error or mistake in a tax return
How & why penalties are calculated

How to Appeal a Tax Penalty
Step by step guide to ensure that you appeal all the right things

Grounds for Appeal: Toolkit
It's vital to understand and correctly state your grounds for appeal

Grounds for Appeal: HMRC error
An error by HMRC can invalidate an assessment: this guide tracks key decisions on this ever changing topic.

Grounds for Appeal: Reasonable Excuse
What is a reasonable excuse and why is it important to consider whether you have one?

 

External links

 

 Harold Wiesenfeld and Alex Strom v HMRC [2019] UKUT 0301 (TCC)