Overview Of Reliance On A Tax Adviser Ineffective To Excuse Delay
In the case of Miah v Revenue And Customs [2022] UKFTT 228 (TC) (“Miah”), reliance on a tax adviser was ineffective to excuse the taxpayer’s delay.
When a taxpayer seeks to appeal late, reliance upon a tax adviser is a relevant consideration but the basic principle is that a failure by the tax adviser who acts as an agent for the taxpayer is a failure by the taxpayer themselves. In short, therefore, the excuse of reliance upon a tax adviser is unlikely to assist the taxpayer unless they have been misled by the adviser.
Mistake By A Tax Adviser Is The Taxpayer’s Mistake
If your tax adviser makes a mistake or is careless then those are deemed the taxpayer’s mistakes and carelessness. But if the tax adviser’s conduct is egregious such that there is some higher ranking error such as misleading conduct or deception, then the Tax Tribunal may well be more forgiving. However, it will depend on the facts of the case.
This is unsurprising because a party who litigates may enter into a contract with their adviser and they may have remedies in respect of any neglect. But it would appear to be unfair to the other party in litigation (who at the Tax Tribunal is usually HMRC) to suffer without a remedy because of the other party’s adviser.
Although not an issue in this case, to highlight the issue, it is not unheard of for a party in litigation to instruct a solicitor who comes off the record when they have not been paid. In such an instance the party instructing them may then have difficulties and might be unable to conduct the litigation efficiently as required by the rules. As a result, it is also not unheard of for such a party upon realising the consequences ie. that their case may start having more holes in it than swiss cheese, to then reach for their cheque book with extra expedition.
However, it would appear unfair to the other party in the litigation to suffer any delay due to matters entirely outside of their control and down to the conduct of their opponent’s adviser who might have not fully complied with the rules.
What Happened In Miah?
In Miah, the taxpayer’s adviser issued a witness statement and informed the Tax Tribunal she was unable to attend the hearing of the taxpayer’s appeal. It was noted by the Tribunal that such notice of unavailability did not include an application to relist the hearing of the application on 13 July 2022 and no reason was provided for the non-attendance.
The usual position is that a witness statement requires the witness to attend for cross-examination so that it can be tested. HMRC objected to the tax adviser’s witness statement. As a result, no real weight was afforded to the witness statement.
Reliance On An HMRC Tax Adviser Rejected
The Tax Tribunal rejected the excuse for the delay in filing the Notice of Appeal due to reliance on the tax adviser. It was not deemed a good reason.
HMRC highlighted the following point from Katib v HMRC [2019] UKUT 189 (TCC) as to reliance on a tax adviser:
We accept HMRC’s general point that, in most cases, when the FTT is considering an application for permission to make a late appeal, failings by a litigant’s advisers should be regarded as failings of the litigant.
This point was developed further with reference to the Court of Appeal’s judgment in Hytec Information Systems v Coventry City Council [1997] 1 WLR 666 (“Hytec”). Ward LJ, giving the leading judgment, said at p 1675:
Ordinarily this court should not distinguish between the litigant himself and his advisers. There are good reasons why the court should not: firstly, if anyone is to suffer for the failure of the solicitor it is better that it be the client than another party to the litigation; secondly, the disgruntled client may in appropriate cases have his remedies in damages or in respect of the wasted costs; thirdly, it seems to me that it would become a charter for the incompetent…
Result: Reliance On A Tax Adviser Ineffective To Excuse Delay
The Tax Tribunal found that reliance by Mr Miah on a tax adviser did not provide him with a good reason for the delay and refused his permission to notify his appeal late.
Are you a UK taxpayer?
If you are a taxpayer, Oliver Elliot can help you. We Know Insolvency Inside Out.
Share This Page!
What Next?
Expert Advice Is Just A Click Away
If you have any questions in relation to Reliance On A Tax Adviser Ineffective To Excuse Delay then contact us as soon as possible for advice. Oliver Elliot offers a fresh approach to insolvency and the liquidation of a company by offering specialist advice and services across a wide range of insolvency procedures.
Our expertise is at your fingertips.
Disclaimer: Reliance On A Tax Adviser Ineffective To Excuse Delay
This page Reliance On A Tax Adviser Ineffective To Excuse Delay is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. This article is provided for information purposes only. You can contact us on the specific facts of your case to obtain relevant advice via a Free Initial Consultation.
Recent Posts / View All Posts
