See also: https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/any-answers/are-ps100-late-filing-fines-...
How did you spend the time you saved by not typing the A or the E in "are"? I hope you did something nice with it.
And the S.
Wait. WTF is Justin's link to another AWeb thread dealing with late filing penalties, when there actually was a (nother Thomas) tribunal decision on late filing penalties for SDLT returns just the other day.
Ah, the right link is in the OP, right after the word @r5e. Silly me.
Ho, ho. There is of course a 50 letter question limit, hence the "R".
I don't agree that this case can be used to show that all late filing penalties for SDLT1 are invalid.
HMRC was at fault here because it did not issue VAT number or UTR number to the taxpayer in time for the SDLT1 to be filed and SDLT to be paid, thus the taxpayer had a reasonable excuse. Taxpayer could not use company number instead of UTR as it was an LLP, not a company.
I note that taxpayer has asked for its costs to be paid by HMRC.
If you read the case that VAT/UTR issue was an additional reasonable excuse reason and the taxpayer would have won regardless of that for the non-human penalty issuer reason alone (like in the similar income tax late filing penalty case per the above link).https://www.gov.uk/guidance/sdlt-appeal-against-a-penalty
Another recent similar case re CT is here:http://financeandtax.decisions.tribunals.gov.uk//judgmentfiles/j10293/TC...