Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.
Santander bank
istock_whitemay_aw

Delay in providing statements was reasonable

by

Pervez Akhtar appealed [TC07545] against a penalty for failure to provide bank statements as demanded by HMRC. The FTT decided he had a reasonable excuse for not delivering all the information on time.

28th Feb 2020
Save content
Have you found this content useful? Use the button above to save it to your profile.

On 18 December 2018, HMRC issued Pervez Akhtar an information notice under FA 2008, Sch 36, para 1. This required him to provide a number of documents, including bank statements from his accounts held with Santander and NatWest banks, that covered a six-year period to 18 December 2018.

AKA (Akhtar’s accountants) wrote to HMRC and secured an extension of the period to deliver the documents from 22 January to 4 February 2019. AKA had confirmed that Akhtar had requested the bank statements from both banks. But, as he had to rely on the banks as third parties to provide the statements, he could not guarantee that the statements would arrive before 22 January 2019.

Documents delivered

On 31 January 2019 AKA sent HMRC:

  • Bank statements from NatWest for the required period (4 December 2012 to 20 January 2017, when the account was closed); and
  • Bank statements from Santander for the period 1 January 2013 to 22 January 2019.

Register for free to continue reading

It’s 100% free and provides unlimited access to the latest accounting news, advice and insight every day. As well as access to this exclusive article, you can:


Content lock down, tick icon

View all AccountingWEB content


Content lock down, tick icon

Comment on articles


Content lock down, tick icon

Watch our digital shows and more

Access content now

Already have an account?

Replies (1)

Please login or register to join the discussion.

paddle steamer
By DJKL
04th Mar 2020 18:04

Given what was delivered to HMRC on time they ought to have used some common sense here, virtually all they asked for had been delivered- it is these sorts of things that give HMRC a really bad name and it certainly has the smell of vendetta if they are pushing on this issue re a £300 fine when obviously there is a much bigger case under discussion (why else do they ask for the docs for all these years?)

Thanks (0)