TC00057 Koundakjian v Revenue & Customs [2009] UKFTT 89 (TC) (06 May 2009)


BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!



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

First-tier Tribunal (Tax)
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> First-tier Tribunal (Tax) >> Koundakjian v Revenue & Customs [2009] UKFTT 89 (TC) (06 May 2009)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/TC/2009/TC00057.html
Cite as: [2009] UKFTT 89 (TC)

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

Koundakjian v Revenue & Customs [2009] UKFTT 89 (TC) (06 May 2009)
VAT - REPAYMENTS
Vat - repayments
    [2009] UKFTT 89 (TC)
    TC00057
    Appeal Number: Man/08/1254
    FIRST TIER TRIBUNAL
    TAX
    DECISION NOTICE WITH FULL REASONS
    Rule 35(2) The Tribunal Procedure (First Tier Tribunal) (Tax Chamber) Rules 2009
    JEFFREY KOUNDAKJIAN Appellant
    - and -
    THE COMMISSIONERS FOR
    HER MAJESTY'S REVENUE and CUSTOMS Respondents
    Tribunal: MICHAEL TILDESLEY OBE (Chairman)
    ALBAN HOLDEN (Member)
    Sitting in public at Manchester on 14 April 2009
    The Appellant did not appear
    Bernard Hayley of the Solicitor's office of HM Revenue & Customs, for the Respondents
    © CROWN COPYRIGHT 2009

     
    DECISION
    The Appeal
  1. The Appellant was appealing against HMRC decision dated 28 July 2008 refusing repayment of £2,160 in respect of VAT assessed for the periods 03/04 to 12/04 inclusive. The reason for the refusal was that the claim for repayment was made more than three years after the end of the accounting periods in which the assessments were made.

  2. The Appellant considered the decision unfair particularly as his wife, the registered person for VAT, did not owe the VAT assessed and had recently died.

  3. The Tribunal proceeded to hear the Appeal in the Appellant's absence in accordance with rule 33 of Tribunal Rules 2007.

    4. The Facts Found
  4. The Appellant was the personal representative for his late wife's estate. His wife sadly died on 17 March 2008.

  5. Mrs Koundakjian was registered for VAT with effect from 1 April 1997 under the general heading of management consultancy services. The registration as at 27 October 2008 remained extant although an application for cancellation of the registration had been received by HMRC.

  6. On 16 July 2008 the Appellant in his capacity as personal representative submitted nil VAT returns for periods 03/04, 06/04, 09/04 and 12/04. Previously HMRC had issued assessments for unpaid VAT in the sum of £540 for each period because the returns had not been made by the due date. The Appellant's wife had paid the amounts owing under the assessments.

  7. On 28 July 2008 HMRC processed the returns which had the effect of cancelling the assessments in the total sum of £2,160. HMRC refused to repay the £2,160 to the Appellant because the returns were rendered more than three years after the end of the relevant accounting periods.

  8. The end of the accounting periods for which the assessments were made were 30 June 2004, 30 September 2004, 12 November 2004, and 11 February 2005.

    9. The Decision
  9. Section 80(1A) of the VAT Act 1994 entitles the Appellant to a refund of VAT incorrectly accounted for as output tax. Under section 80(4) HMRC shall not be liable to make a refund where the claim is made more than three years after the relevant date. The relevant date is defined as the end of a prescribed accounting period in which the assessment is made (see section 80 (4ZA)(d).

  10. In this Appeal the refund claim was made on 16 July 2008 which was more than three years after the end of the disputed accounting periods. The end date for the last accounting period was 11 February 2005. Under section 80(4) the Tribunal has no discretion to extend the three year time limit. In those circumstances the Appeal is dismissed.

    11. MICHAEL TILDESLEY OBE
    TRIBUNAL JUDGE
    RELEASE DATE: 6 May 2009
    Man/
    Notes
  11. A party wishing to Appeal this decision to the Upper Tribunal must seek permission by making an application in writing to the Tribunal within 56 days of being provided with full written reasons for the decision. An application for permission must identify the alleged error(s) in the decision and state the result the party making the application is seeking.

BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/TC/2009/TC00057.html