FTTTx Excise Duty – restoration of excise goods deemed condemned as forfeit – seizure based on mismatch between shipping documents and physical load – 2 pallets found to contain lesser quantity of different type of lager than listed on shipping documents – liability to forfeiture not contested – restoration requested – refused and refusal confirmed on review – basis of refusal stated to be that goods seized should not normally be restored, and in the absence of notice contesting the lawfulness of the seizure, the goods were deemed lawfully seized – no ‘exceptional circumstances’ justifying restoration found, also doubts about ownership of the goods expressed – HMRC v Jones and Jones relied on – held evidence of ownership sufficient, mismatch attributable to simple error from which no advantage could be seen to accrue – vague suggestions of prior fraud unsubstantiated and not relied on – on the basis of the relevant information no reasonable officer could have refused to restore the goods – direction given for further review to be carried out on the basis that ownership of the goods has been established, the mismatch was due to a simple error and there was no association with any attempted fraudulent evasion of duty – appeal allowed
Citations:
[2013] UKFTT 735 (TC)
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Customs and Excise
Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.519616