Case – HMRC filing date discrepancies lead to successful CIS penalty appeal
Case facts. In PM Reinforcements (NW) Limited v HMRC, one of the issues that the company appealed against was the penalties charged by HMRC for apparent late filing of CIS returns. The company’s accountant had evidence from the Moneysoft software that he used to submit the CIS returns which shows the returns were submitted much earlier (and before the relevant deadlines) than the dates HMRC said the returns were submitted. For example, the company had an e-mail receipt from HMRC showing that the return was submitted on 17 June 2016, so before the 19 June 2016 deadline, but HMRC said it hadn’t been submitted until 27 June 2016 and charged a £100 late filing penalty.
Decision. The tribunal decided that the Moneysoft screen prints showing the IRmarks, submission dates and date accepted by HMRC could be relied upon and the conflicting submission data from HMRC should be ignored. Therefore, the penalties for the returns where the company had provided direct evidence of the date of submission were cancelled.