BPP University College of Professional Studies v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 1 Jul 2014

FTTTx HMRC directed to provide further and better particulars – unless order breached – whether HMRC should be barred – whether Mitchell applies – HMRC barred.
Judge Mosedale
[2014] UKFTT 644 (TC)
Finance Act 2011 75
England and Wales
CitedMitchell MP v News Group Newspapers Ltd CA 27-Nov-2013
(Practice Note) The claimant brought defamation proceedings against the defendant newspaper. His solicitors had failed to file his costs budget as required, and the claimant now appealed against an order under the new Rule 3.9, restricting very . .
CitedHM Revenue and Customs v McCarthy and Stone (Developments) Limited, Monarch Realisations No 1 Plc (In Administration) UTTC 10-Jan-2014
UTTC Procedure – Application under Rule 5(3)(a) Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 for extension of time to provide notice of appeal to Upper Tribunal under Rule 23(2)(a) – effect of amendments to CPR . .

Cited by:
Appeal fromRevenue and Customs v BPP Holdings Ltd and Others UTTC 3-Oct-2014
PROCEDURE – HMRC barred from further participation – FTT rule 8 – whether FTT applied correct principles – no – whether FTT’s decision outside reasonable exercise of judicial discretion – yes – decision set aside and remade – no barring order . .
At FTTTxBPP Holdings v Revenue and Customs CA 1-Mar-2016
HMRC had been debarred from further participation in the proceedings. BPP provided training courses, and the issue was as to the chargeability to VAT of books supplied between companies in the group. In the proceedings, HMRC repeatedly failed to . .
At FTTTxBPP Holdings Ltd and Others v Revenue and Customs SC 26-Jul-2017
The Revenue had challenged a decision by the FTTTx to bar it from defending an appeal as to VAT liability. It had failed first to meet procedural time limits and on the issue of an unless order had failed to comply. The Revenue challenged the . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 March 2021; Ref: scu.534266