19598

LONDON TRIBUNAL CENTRE	Reference No: LON/05/0070
                                                                                                         
                                                                                                          Copy sent to :    

                                                                                                                               Appellant /Applicant :

                                                                                                                                Respondents :																											                                      

	CHRISTOPHER PAUL KOSSIFOS	Appellant
T/A HAIRWORKS

	and 

	HER MAJESTY’S COMMISSIONERS OF 
	REVENUE AND CUSTOMS	Respondents

	Tribunal:  Rodney P Huggins (Chairman)
                                                              Claire Howell   

Sitting in private in Plymouth on 28 September 2005

DIRECTION
	Under Rule 30(8)

THIS APPEAL against a decision of the Respondents with respect to various Default Surcharges being a reasonable excuse appeal as defined by Rule 2 of the Value Added Tax Tribunals Rules 1986 as amended coming on for hearing this day

AND UPON HEARING Elizabeth Kossifos representing the Appellant and Jonathan Holl, Advocate for the Respondents.

AND THIS TRIBUNAL having heard this appeal and having announced its decision

AND THE parties present at the hearing by their said representatives stating pursuant to Rule 30(8) of the Value Added Tax Tribunals Rules 1986 as amended that they do not require the said decision to be recorded in a written document in accordance with Rule 30(1) of the said Rules.

THIS TRIBUNAL FINDS THAT the Appellant has provided reasonable excuses for two of the default surcharges as follows :

First. For the period 01/07/2002 to 30/09/2002 the Appellant’s bank erroneously dishonoured the cheque for the VAT.   Secondly, for the period 01/10/2002 to 31/12/2002 the Appellant and his wife who assisted him in his business were both suffering from illnesses which prevented them from carrying out their administrative functions competently.

Thereafter, the Appellant and his wife should have made alternative arrangements for their VAT returns,

AND THIS TRIBUNAL DIRECTS THAT this appeal is ALLOWED in part and the default surcharges amended accordingly.

AND that there is to be no direction as to costs.

 Rodney P Huggins
Chairman

Release Date: 23 May 2006

©  CROWN COPYRIGHT 2006